African Catalytic Growth Fund

Mark Simmonds: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development if he will make a statement on the establishment of the African Catalytic Growth Fund.

Hilary Benn: The World Bank's Africa Action Plan, which forms part of the World Bank's response to the commitments made at Gleneagles last June and was endorsed by bank governors at their annual meeting in Washington in September, proposed the establishment of a "Catalytic Growth Fund". Its purpose is to help Africa make faster progress on meeting the MDGs, particularly the "hardest-to-reach" ones like health and access to water, and increasing the rate of economic growth. Its aim is to complement other sources of development financing, including those from the International Development Association (IDA), while, at the same time, being innovative and creative in supporting countries that have shown an ability to make good use of increased amounts of aid, as well as countries with reforming and post-conflict Governments that show a commitment to reducing poverty. Money will also be given to regional projects to deal with needs that cross borders.
	We welcome the Bank's agreement that use of the Fund will be guided by the priorities of the Africa Partnership Forum and that the World Bank will ensure regular consultations with Fund donors, African Governments and regional institutions.
	The Fund will be financed by voluntary contributions from World Bank members. The UK is the first country to pledge support, our £200 million contribution was announced in October 2005. The Bank is also seeking contributions from other donors. We expect the first projects to be approved in the coming months.

Development Aid

Philip Hollobone: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development which Commonwealth countries receive international development aid.

Gareth Thomas: I refer the hon. Gentleman to the table providing details of DAC and UK Bilateral and Multilateral funding for 2004 to Commonwealth Countries.
	DFID also provides non-attributable core support to the range of Commonwealth countries through the Programmes of the Commonwealth Secretariat.
	
		Total DAC and UK bilateral and multilateral official development assistance/official aid (ODA/OA) by recipient country 2004(1) Net bilateral ODA/OA(2)
		
			   of which:   
			 Country United Kingdom Debt relief(3) Total DAC donors Total multilateral(4) 
		
		
			 Antigua and Barbuda 0.0 — 0.7 0.7 
			 Bangladesh 137.9 — 345.4 406.7 
			 Barbados 0.2 — 1.4 14.5 
			 Belize 0.2 1.0 2.1 2.3 
			 Botswana 0.3 — 17.8 4.5 
			 Brunei 0.0 — 0.4 0.0 
			 Cameroon 16.4 15.0 312.2 102.9 
			 Cyprus 0.0 — 11.9 17.3 
			 Dominica -2.0 — 5.8 10.0 
			 Fiji(5) 0.0 — 19.9 14.8 
			 Gambia 0.3 — 6.4 27.8 
			 Ghana 143.8 64.0 489.4 246.4 
			 Grenada 0.4 — 5.7 2.9 
			 Guyana 11.1 — 44.1 34.8 
			 India 202.0 — 11.4 364.1 
			 Jamaica 4.1 3.0 4.3 35.5 
			 Kenya 25.0 — 256.2 90.8 
			 Kiribati(5) 0.0 — 5.5 3.6 
			 Lesotho 4.0 — 19.1 37.1 
			 Malawi 65.2 0.0 168.3 90.7 
			 Malaysia 0.3 — 156.5 1.7 
			 Maldives 0.2 — 4.9 7.4 
			 Malta 0.0 — 0.2 3.8 
			 Mauritius 0.1 — 8.0 13.9 
			 Mozambique 36.0 — 397.3 270.9 
			 Namibia 1.5 — 70.8 18.4 
			 Nigeria 68.8 — 171.5 141.7 
			 Pakistan 49.6 23.0 208.8 559.1 
			 Papua New Guinea(5) 0.0 — 136.4 9.4 
			 Samoa (Western)(5) 0.0 — 13.4 3.3 
			 Seychelles 0.0 — 3.3 1.6 
			 Sierra Leone 33.2 0.0 89.0 106.7 
			 Singapore 0.0 — 5.0 0.0 
			 Solomon Islands(5) 0.0 — 63.7 2.9 
			 South Africa 47.5 — 251.2 85.3 
			 Sri Lanka 9.2 — T84.3 87.6 
			 St. Kitts and Nevis 0.0 — -0.1 0.5 
			 St. Lucia -15.1 — -13.0 1.3 
			 St. Vincent and Grenadines 0.0 — 4.0 2.1 
			 Swaziland 0.8 — 57.0 6.4 
			 Tanzania 117.7 — 561.8 389.5 
			 Tonga(5) 0.0 — 8.1 2.4 
			 Trinidad and Tobago 0.2 — 3.9 -4.4 
			 Tuvalu(5) 0.0 — 2.9 1.4 
			 Uganda 58.7 — 372.5 259.1 
			 Vanuatu(5) 0.0 — 18.9 1.7 
			 Zambia 154.2 133.0 406.7 181.8 
		
	
	(1) 2003 data are shown since these are the latest figures available for all columns in the table except UK net bilateral ODA/OA and presenting 2004 figures for this column would prevent comparisons.
	(2) Total net bilateral ODA/OA comprises flows from 22 DAC member countries, including the UK but excludes the European Commission.
	(3) DFID also reported £0.56 million as a multilateral payment to the HIPC trust fund in 2003.
	(4) Total amounts presented here. Figures are not yet available for the imputed UK share of multilateral net ODA/OA.
	(5) Individual country information is not available as UK to Pacific expenditure is at regional level only.

Energy Efficiency

Nadine Dorries: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what steps he is taking to increase energy efficiency within his Department; and if he will make a statement.

Gareth Thomas: The Department for International Development (DFID) is strongly committed to the targets set out in the Framework for Sustainable Development on the Government Estate. During the refurbishments of our UK offices we incorporated many energy saving mechanisms; for instance, a new building management system allow us to monitor and manage energy usage to a much greater extent than in the past. DFID has also installed energy efficient heating systems and lighting systems which are movement sensitive and take account of natural lighting levels. An environment management system has been implemented at both UK offices.
	DFID is also currently installing timers to regulate energy usage and additional sub-meters to monitor our energy usage even more closely in the future. We have ensured that 100 per cent. electricity used in our main UK offices is from renewable sources and we are also currently investigating additional options such as combined heat and power plants, solar panels and a wind turbine at our East Kilbride office. The design for the refurbishment of our East Kilbride office has received an "excellent" and the London office a "very good" rating under the Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Methodology (BREEAM). We are also actively encouraging staff to use energy efficiently, for instance by switching off equipment when not in use rather than simply leaving on "stand-by". DFID is also in the process of arranging under the Carbon Trust Framework Agreement, a carbon management programme including an energy audit of both UK offices.

India

Nicholas Soames: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what the cost was of the British aid programme to India in the last year for which figures are available; what projects the programme funded; and what the objectives of the programme were.

Gareth Thomas: This year, DFID will spend around £250 million in India—the Department's largest country programme in the world.
	DFID's India programme supports the achievement of the Government of India's (GoI) 10th Plan and Millennium Development Goal (MDG) poverty reduction targets, as outlined in our India Country Assistance Plan (CAP) for 2004–08 (available on DFID's website www.dfid.gov.uk).
	The programme is provided in close partnership with the Union Government and the State Governments of Andhra Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Orissa and West Bengal. In these states, and at the national level, DFID supports the Indian Government's measures to improve the quality and poverty impact of public policies and services and in creating the necessary conditions for economic growth. Our funds are directed at increasing access to basic education and health and to improving the lives of poor people in rural and urban areas. We also promote better management of the environment and support activities to empower the poor, especially women and those who are less able to represent themselves.
	For example, in West Bengal, our Kolkata Urban Services for the Poor Programme aims to help slum dwellers directly, through funding improvements to slum infrastructure (for example; better drainage, road systems, latrines, solid waste management), and indirectly and in the longer term through supporting overall city management, building in a poverty focus to urban planning, strengthening urban management systems, and working to help municipal authorities become more accountable to citizens. A parallel programme operates in Andhra Pradesh and one is also planned for Madhya Pradesh.
	In Andhra Pradesh, our Rural Livelihoods Project supports the State Government in helping poor rural households to develop new livelihood options and landless farmers to earn income from the use of common lands through better use of water in drought-prone areas. The project aims to extend the reach of these schemes to target the poorest and most excluded groups including women, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes.
	Alongside assistance to its four focus states, DFID is strengthening its National Programme to provide significant resources for central programmes in key areas, including health and education where progress towards the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) needs to accelerate. For example, DFID is currently supporting the Government of India's Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (Education for All) programme with a £210 million commitment in close collaboration with other donors. This programme is aimed at ensuring that by 2010, all children in India receive eight years of basic education of acceptable quality regardless of sex, caste, creed, family income or location and has already resulted in a reduction in the number of out of school children from 25 million in 2003 to 13.5 million in March 2005. DFID is also financing over 20 per cent. (£128 million) of the Government of India's National Polio Eradication Programme, which has succeeded in confining this disease to only a few isolated pockets in the country.
	Through the National and State programmes, DFID is also placing renewed emphasis on support to Indian civil society, to strengthen the capacity of poor people to participate in decisions affecting their lives.
	A table of all projects currently supported by DFID India is as follows:
	
		DFID India programme and projects active in financial year 2005–06
		
			 Programme/Project Project start date 
		
		
			 Andhra Pradesh Power Sector Reforms—Phase 2 1993 
			 West Bengal District Primary Education—Phase 1 1997 
			 Andhra Pradesh Economic Restructuring Project 1998 
			 Oil Seeds 1998 
			 Andhra Pradesh Urban Services for the Poor 1999 
			 Orissa: Public Sector Enterprise Reforms Extension Phase 1999 
			 West Bengal District Primary Education—Phase II 1999 
			 Western India Rainfed Farming Project 1999 
			 Andhra Pradesh Rural Livelihoods 1999 
			 National Microfmance Support Project-SIDBI 1999 
			 Western Orissa Rural Livelihoods Project 2000 
			 Orissa: Post Cyclone Reconstruction of Primary Schools 2001 
			 Kolkatta Environment Improvement Project 2001 
			 Poorest Areas Civil Society Programme 2001 
			 Orissa: District Primary Education Programme 2001 
			 Pulse Polio—support for polio eradication 2002 
			 Orissa: Interim Health Sector Support 2002 
			 Madhya Pradesh: Technical Assistance for Power Sector Reform 2002 
			 Orissa: Public Sector Enterprise Reforms II 2003 
			 Madhya Pradesh Health Guarantee Scheme 2003 
			 Orissa Civil Society Programme 2003 
			 Madhya Pradesh: Rural Livelihoods 2003 
			 Pro-Poor Globalisation Support for UNCTAD 2003 
			 Orissa: Industrial Policy Resolution 2003 
			 West Bengal: Public Sector Enterprise Reforms—Phase 1 2004 
			 Kolkatta Urban Services for the Poor 2004 
			 India: Access to Justice Programme 2004 
			 UNICEF—Child Environment Phase II 2004 
			 National AIDS Control Programme 2004 
			 Sarv Shiksha Abhiyan 2004 
			 Child Registration—support to UNICEF 2004 
			 Maternal Mortality Rate (MMR) advocacy component of UNICEF 2004 
			 Reproductive and Child Health II—Technical Assistance to UNFPA 2004 
			 Small and Medium Enterprise Development Programme 2004 
			 Pilot Private Sector Partnerships Project 2004 
			 Orissa: Tribal Empowerment and Livelihoods 2004 
			 ADB Trust Fund 2004 
			 UNDP Trust Fund 2004 
			 UNDP Trust Fund (Disaster Risk Management Programme) 2004 
			 UNICEF—Floods 2005 
			 ILO IPAC Elimination of Child Labour 2005 
			 Capacity Building for Poverty Reduction 2005 
			 West Bengal Health Sector Support 2005 
			 West Bengal: Civil Society Organisations 2005 
			 Andhra Pradesh Education Strategies Project 2005 
			 Pulse Polio—support to WHO 2005 
			 Pulse Polio—support to UNICEF 2005 
			 Reproductive and Child Health Programme—Phase 2 2005 
			 Revised National Tuberculosis Programme—Phase 2 (National) 2005 
			 Environment Planning and Co-ordination 2005 
			 World Bank Trust Fund 2005 
			 West Bengal: Support for Rural Decentralisation 2006 
			 UNICEF Strategic Partnership for India Trust Fund 2006

Rwanda

Eric Joyce: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development if he will make a statement on the Government's partnership with the Rwandan Government on development.

Hilary Benn: The Governments of the United Kingdom and the Republic of Rwanda have concluded discussions on their development partnership and have signed a new Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) to this effect. The new MoU, which was signed on 13 February by representatives of the two Governments, supercedes the previous MoU originally signed in 1999.
	The new 10-year arrangement re-affirms and extends the UK's development partnership with Rwanda. The partnership focuses on reducing poverty reduction and the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals in Rwanda, as well as the promotion of peace and stability in the Great Lakes region.
	Currently, we allocate bilateral development assistance worth £46 million each year to Rwanda. Subject to Rwanda honouring its commitments under the MoU, the UK expects to maintain bilateral assistance at this level or higher over the next 10 years. Of this, we expect that at least two thirds will be provided as Poverty Reduction Budget Support.
	In recent years, the United Kingdom has provided substantial development assistance to Rwanda. There have been good results in the form of impressive development progress, with improvements in the quality of life of Rwanda's people, as well as increased peace and security. It is in the light of this good progress that we have agreed the new MoU as a basis for providing more predictable finance for Rwanda's development.
	The MoU sets out shared objectives as well as specific commitments made by each side and arrangements for monitoring and review. The MoU also specifies circumstances under which the UK's development assistance may be interrupted or reduced. The MoU will be underpinned by a set of specific, monitorable benchmarks, to be agreed with the Government of Rwanda. These will provide a clear basis for monitoring adherence to the MoU as well as tracking the progress of our development partnership with Rwanda, and will provide a basis for continuing dialogue and discussion with the Government of Rwanda.
	I have arranged for copies of the document entitled 'Memorandum of Understanding between the Government of the United Kingdom and Northern Ireland and the Government of the Republic of Rwanda' to be placed in the Libraries of the House.

Emergencies

Julian Brazier: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what recent estimate he has made of the number of British seafarers available to provide strategic support at times of national emergency; and if he will make a statement.

Stephen Ladyman: I refer to the hon. Member to the answer given by my right hon. Friend, the Minister of State for Defence on 16 February 2006, Official Report, column 2208W, which describes the arrangements to provide strategic support for movements by sea at times of national emergency or on any other occasion. That answer also refers to the Department's monitoring of the numbers of UK seafarers, which is an annual analysis that is carried out by London Metropolitan University under a three year contract which is part funded by the Ministry of Defence.
	The requirement is to estimate the number of UK seafarers in 2004, 2005 and 2006 in accordance with given seafarer definitions, classifications and characteristics.
	The title of the most recent publication is "United Kingdom Seafarers Analysis 2004". The report is published in paper form and is also available for download from the Department's website, www.dft.gov.uk . The next analysis for the year 2005 is due to be published this spring.

Railway Franchises

Anthony Steen: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport why his Department's tender document for the West of England franchise specifies a reduction in the number of trains calling at Totnes; and if he will make a statement.

Derek Twigg: holding answer 3 March 2006
	The Great Western Franchise specification was designed to improve the overall operational and financial performance of the train service and to ensure resources were used to best meet market needs. The timetable on each route, including Totnes is derived from these requirements.
	Most passengers in the Great Western Franchise area will see the same or improved service. First's consultation on their draft timetable has now closed and First are in discussion with the Department to address stakeholder concerns. The proposed service at Totnes forms part of these discussions.

Road Improvements

Ashok Kumar: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how much his Department has allocated in road improvements in (a) each English region, (b) the Tees Valley and (c) Middlesbrough South and East Cleveland constituency in each year since 1997.

Stephen Ladyman: A table has been placed in the Libraries of the House, showing funding by region, where funding was provided through the Local Transport Plan process, excluding London. We do not hold information centrally on a constituency by constituency basis.
	The following table shows the Highways Agency's total expenditure since 1998–99. Information is not readily available for 1997–98 and is not routinely recorded by region or constituency.
	
		
			  £ million 
			  Amount 
		
		
			 1998–99 1,355 
			 1999–2000 1,389 
			 2000–01 1,413 
			 2001–02 1,548 
			 2002–03 1,705 
			 2003–04 1,479 
			 2004–05 1,633 
		
	
	Note:
	This information includes expenditure on roads in London until the creation of Transport for London in 2000. The later numbers do not include this expenditure, which is now a matter for the Mayor of London and the Greater London Assembly. The apparent decrease in spending between 2002–03 and 2003–04 is due to a change in accounting treatment of lands provisions.

Road Traffic Accidents (Wild Animals)

Brooks Newmark: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what steps his Department takes to monitor roads which have a high incidence of collisions between motor vehicles and wild animals.

Stephen Ladyman: The Highways Agency (HA) is responsible for management and improvement of the trunk road and motorway network and is responsible for clearance of the highway following animal/vehicle collisions (AVCs).
	The HA has undertaken research to prioritise implementation of mitigation measures to avoid such incidents. These include studies to review and prioritise implementation of otter protection measures and more recently a study to collate records of deer casualties in order to prioritise measures to prevent accidents. The latter was done in a partnership involving local highway authorities.
	The HA is in the process of developing an environmental information system in which data on all AVC incidents will be held. This will inform improved targeting of preventative measures on the network in the future.
	On local roads it would be for the respective local highway authority to decide on what monitoring arrangements to have in place.

Seat Belts

David Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport 
	(1)  if he will bring forward legislation to require the installation of a seat belt reminder system in all new motor vehicles sold in the UK; and if he will make a statement;
	(2)  what research his Department has (a) undertaken and (b) funded into the merits of installing a seat belt reminder system in all new motor vehicles sold in the UK; and if he will make a statement.

Stephen Ladyman: It would be inappropriate to introduce unilateral constructional requirements for all new motor vehicles sold in the UK, as any vehicle that conforms to European Type Approval requirements must be permitted to be placed on the market and used in the UK.
	The UK already has a high proportion of seat belt wearing. Research has taken place in Sweden which suggests that seat belt reminders can significantly increase seat belt wearing rates. I have no plans to undertake or fund more research.
	A number of passenger cars are already fitted with some form of seat belt reminder. Since 2002, this has been encouraged by the European New Car Assessment Programme (EuroNCAP), who award additional points to a vehicle fitted with a seat belt reminder that conforms to their protocol. About 75 per cent. of new models now being tested have them fitted.
	Discussions are taking place within Europe to incorporate into the requirements for seat belts a specification for seat belt reminder systems based on the Euro NCAP protocol. In addition CARS 21 (Competitive Automotive Regulatory System for the 21st century) a high level group established by the European Commission, has recommended that the Commission bring forward a proposal to mandate seat belt reminders.

Transport Infrastructure (Norfolk)

Christopher Fraser: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what funding he has allocated for transport infrastructure in Norfolk in each of the last five years.

Stephen Ladyman: Spending on transport infrastructure within Norfolk over the last five years has taken place via the funding Norfolk receive as part of their Local Transport Plan settlement and the Highways Agency investment to support the strategic highway network within Norfolk. The following figures are the yearly allocations for local transport funding, comprising of capital funding for integrated transport and the funding allocations for local transport major schemes within Norfolk.
	
		
			  £ 
			  Amount 
		
		
			 2005–06 9,700,000 
			 2004–05 16,375,000 
			 2003–04 11,588,000 
			 2002–03 11,225,000 
			 2001–02 15,546,000 
		
	
	These figures exclude the £95,953,000 capital funding that has been awarded to Norfolk over the last five years for highway maintenance.
	The Highways Agency does not routinely report information on a regional basis and we, therefore, are unable to provide expenditure figures on either small schemes or maintenance. However, the following table provides the expenditure that has been spent on Highways Agency major schemes, costing over £5 million, in Norfolk in the last five years.
	
		
			   £ million 
			 Project 2000–01 2001–02 2002–03 2003–04 2004–05 2005–06(6) 
		
		
			 A11 Roudham Health—Attleborough improvement 4.28 12.70 10.29 0.00 0.00 0.00 
			 A11 Attleborough Bypass 0.26 0.15 0.51 1.36 1.10 5.74 
			 A11 Fiveways—Thetford improvement 0.20 0.10 1.55 -0.41 0.57 0.27 
			 A47 Blofield to North Burlingham Dualling — — 0.61 -0.10 1.42 0.32 
			 Total spend 4.74 12.95 12.96 0.85 3.09 6.33 
		
	
	(6) Indicates the position as at 31 December 2005.
	Notes:
	1. Values reflect the total value of additions in year. This includes all project costs including lands, capitalised salaries, accruals and provisions and adjustments for surplus properties.
	2. The negative values in 2003–04 reflect a change made to the calculation of lands provisions in the year.

Transport Projects

Paul Rowen: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what steps his Department takes to tackle optimism bias in transport project promoters' estimation of capital costs.

Stephen Ladyman: holding answer 22 March 2006
	The department is taking a number of steps to tackle the systematic tendency for promoters to be overly optimistic in estimating capital costs.
	Firstly, to ensure that optimism bias is factored into decision making the department makes explicit adjustments to promoters cost estimates within economic appraisal. The adjustments are empirically based (e.g. using data on cost overruns for transport projects in the past).
	Secondly, the department is taking a number of steps to try to reduce optimism bias in the future. These include:
	Issuing improved guidance on cost estimation and risk assessment (including requiring a Quantitative Risk Assessment to be undertaken for all larger major schemes).
	More closely scrutinising promoters' cost estimates to ensure they are realistic and based on the latest cost information.
	Involving private sector contractors earlier in scheme development to help to better estimate costs, improve scheme design and to ensure that schemes are planned in a way that uses existing capacity effectively.
	Providing greater incentives for scheme promoters to produce realistic estimates of cost. This is achieved by only committing to fund risk adjusted cost estimates excluding optimism bias and not automatically funding cost overruns.

Transport Projects

Paul Rowen: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what steps his Department takes to ensure that traffic forecasts provided by project promoters are realistic.

Stephen Ladyman: holding answer 22 March 2006
	A range of appraisal information including assessments using the New Approach to Transport Appraisal system, is required alongside all schemes submitted to the department for funding. Traffic forecasts are used by scheme promoters as part of these appraisals. There is departmental guidance available to promoters, setting out the appropriate use of forecasting techniques, to ensure that traffic is realistically forecasted. The forecasts are checked by the promoters, such as the Highways Agency or other appropriate body, and by the department's modellers. The full appraisal is finally inspected by the department as part of the value for money assessment, to provide ministers with advice on the case for a particular scheme.

Transport Projects

Paul Rowen: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what assessment his Department has made of the difference between demand forecasts used by promoters of (a) rail projects and (b) road projects in advance of building transport projects and the actual recorded demand.

Stephen Ladyman: holding answer 22 March 2006
	The Department, as a matter of routine, expects to assess the impacts arising from major transport schemes which it has supported, against, the forecasts originally made, in order to learn lessons for future schemes.
	With regard to rail, the Department has been monitoring the usage of section one of the Channel Tunnel Rail Link against the original forecasts, as reported by the National Audit Office in their report "Progress on the Channel Tunnel Rail Link", published in July 2005. Further examples of similar evaluations are the studies regarding the Jubilee Line Extension and the Manchester and Sheffield Light Rail Schemes.
	All Highways Agency schemes have been subject to some form of post opening project evaluation, including a comparison of out-turn demand against forecast, since 1981.

Transport Projects

Paul Rowen: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport which major (a) road, (b) rail and (c) other schemes approved since 1997 have assessed future patronage or traffic levels based on (i) a fixed trip matrix and (ii) other forecast models.

Stephen Ladyman: holding answer 22 March 2006
	The Department does not ordinarily compile information on the modelling technique used by external promoters in assessing future patronage; to compile a list of schemes on this basis would be prohibitively expensive. However, scheme promoters are expected to use appropriate techniques in the appraisals of a project, using the guidance published by the Department.
	Since 1997, of some sixty Highways Agency road schemes that have been approved, around 90 per cent. were appraised using a fixed trip matrix method to assess future traffic levels; a similar proportion would be expected for local authority major road schemes. The 'elasticity' approach has been the alternative used in larger schemes. This technique models the growth in traffic induced by the completion of a transport improvement—something a fixed trip matrix would not do. The Department for Transport has recently published guidance for road scheme promoters to encourage greater use of improved 'variable demand' appraisal techniques. All rail schemes are assessed using an 'elasticity' approach. In the largest schemes, affecting a number of modes, full multi-modal studies are conducted which would better articulate modal change as well as induced traffic.

Travel Line

David Kidney: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what assessment he has made of the effectiveness of the new Travel Line services for providing travellers with details of travel by public transport.

Stephen Ladyman: Traveline was launched during the summer 2000, and is managed and funded by local authorities and transport operators.
	During 2001–2002 the Department for Transport, Local Government and the Regions funded on behalf of Traveline three 'mystery shopping' exercises, to assess levels of accuracy and customer service provided. Traveline has continued to fund a further five waves of mystery shopping and will continue with the research for the foreseeable future. Each wave has indicated that the Traveline service has significantly improved in all regions since the first wave of mystery shopping was carried out. The time taken to answer calls and the customer service elements of the calls are generally satisfactory or good, with all scoring 90 per cent. or more in the last wave. Overall 97 per cent. of the answers given were completely accurate and the results show an improvement across the regions.
	The Department for Transport funded a research project in 2003 to assess effective future delivery of Traveline to the customer. As a result of the research Traveline has extended its future minimum opening hours; has identified the requirements for existing Traveline customers; and has established the extent of information that needs to be given by the Traveline service. The recommendations and decisions on changes to the future Traveline service following research are made by Traveline.
	Traveline currently receives over four million calls a year.

Arms Exports

Adam Price: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry whether the Italian government was informed of the re-export of a shipment of Beretta semi-automatic pistols by Super Vision International Ltd. of London before they were transferred to Iraq.

Malcolm Wicks: The Government contributes information on their export licensing decisions, by destination, to the EU Code of Conduct on Arms Exports (COARM) Report. There was otherwise no obligation on the Government to inform any other member state about its export licensing decision in this case.

Carbon Emissions

Alan Duncan: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what estimate his Department has made of the total life-cycle carbon cost of (a) solar, (b) tidal, (c) wind and (d) nuclear power per GWh-generated.

Malcolm Wicks: The Department is aware of a number of studies estimating the total life-cycle emissions and carbon costs of different generation technologies.
	In November 2005 my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister announced that there would be a review of energy policy which would report in summer 2006. This will involve reviewing the existing evidence on the total life-cycle carbon costs of options for meeting the Government's long-term targets for reducing carbon dioxide emissions.

Corporate Behaviour

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry how many investigations have been launched by his Department in each of the last five years into British companies suspected of flouting guidelines on (a) corporate and social responsibility and (b) corruption.

Malcolm Wicks: No investigations have been launched.
	Guidelines on Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) are for guidance only. The UK Government do not have the power to investigate companies which flout various guidelines on CSR including: voluntary initiatives to combat corruption overseas and the OECD Guidelines on multinational enterprises.

Corporate Behaviour

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what assessment he has made of the merits of establishing clear and binding international human rights standards for corporations.

Alun Michael: There are currently no binding international agreements on international human rights standards for corporations. However, in 2005, the UN Secretary-General, at the request of the Commission of Human Rights, appointed a special representative to look at the issue of human rights and trans-national corporations and other business enterprises—a final report is due to be presented to the Commission in 2007.
	The UK will continue to promote several voluntary schemes that provide clear international human rights standards for corporations. These include the Voluntary Principles on Security and Human Rights, Extractive Industries Transparency Initiatives, Global Compact and Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development Guidelines.

Directors' Reports

Alan Duncan: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what progress his Department has made with implementing new rules on directors' reports.

Alun Michael: Following the discussion not to proceed with a mandatory requirement for an Operating and Financial Review, we have invited views on narrative business reporting requirements for the future, with a closing date for responses of 24 March. This consultation has provided an opportunity for all interested parties, including companies and investors, to express their views on all options and relevant issues. The Government will announce its conclusions following consideration of the responses to the consultation and intends to bring forward amendments to reflect any resulting policy changes during the appropriate Parliamentary stages of the Company Law Reform Bill.

Directors' Reports

Alan Duncan: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what estimate he has made of the costs incurred by (a) businesses and (b) his Department on the Companies Act 1985 (OFR and Directors' Report) Regulations 2005.

Alun Michael: The Government assessed the costs of implementing a statutory Operating and Financial Review against those of implementing an enhanced Business Review in a Regulatory Impact Assessment, which was published alongside the DTI's formal response to consultation. It was estimated that a statutory Operating and Financial Review would cost business £33 million per annum more than the Business Review. Most of these additional costs related to the different audit requirements applying to the OFR compared to the Business Review. As the Business Review and OFR reporting requirements are similar, work already undertaken on the preparation of the OFR will be useful in the preparation of the Business Review.
	The costs incurred by the department relate to the work of the relevant Departmental officials and have not been separately calculated. The Regulations covered the business review requirements necessary to implement the EU Accounts Modernisation Directive as well as the mandatory OFR provisions. Only the latter are affected by the announcement in November and the consultation that has just closed.

EU Directives/Regulations

Alan Duncan: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what estimate he has made of the costs to (a) businesses and (b) his Department of the implementation of the (i) Low Voltage Directive, (ii) Measuring Instruments (Automatic Catchweighers) Regulations, (iii) Measuring Instruments (Automatic Discontinuous Totalisers) Regulations and (iv) Measuring Instruments (Automatic Gravimetric Filling Instruments) Regulations.

Barry Gardiner: The information is as follows:
	(i) Low Voltage Directive
	The Low Voltage Directive was last amended in 1993, implementing Regulations being made in 1994 (Electrical Equipment (Safety) Regulations 1994—S.1.1994/3260). At that time a Cost Compliance Assessment was carried out. The annual recurring costs to business were estimated to be £3.5 million (0.0125 per cent. of the estimated industry turnover). The impact on recurring costs to the Department was negligible.
	(ii) Measuring Instruments (Automatic Catchweighers) Regulations, (iii) Measuring Instruments (Automatic Discontinuous Totalisers) Regulations, (iv) Measuring Instruments (Automatic Gravimetric Filling Instruments) Regulations.
	Each of these Regulations is expected to be cost neutral to businesses. There will be a 10 year derogation for existing designs. The costs of verification and certification of new weighing instruments for the UK market will be very similar to the current ones, but certification and verification costs to companies exporting to the EU and EEA will be reduced. The costs to the Department are £60,000 for each Regulation, £180,000 in total.

Low Carbon Building Programme

Colin Challen: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry who will manage the Low Carbon Building Programme on behalf of his Department; when the first round of the programme is expected to be announced; and when community organisations will be able to submit applications to round one of the programme.

Malcolm Wicks: holding answer 23 March 2006
	The contract for programme management of the Low Carbon Buildings Programme has been awarded to the Energy Savings Trust in partnership with the Building Research Establishment.
	The first competition for small-scale community projects will be launched in May.

Merlin Biosciences

David Jones: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry whether he has met (a) Sir Christopher Evans and (b) representatives of Merlin Biosciences Ltd. on official business in the past 12 months; and if he will make a statement.

Barry Gardiner: My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry has not met with Sir Christopher Evans or representatives of Merlin Biosciences Ltd. on official business in the past 12 months.

Small Businesses

David Kidney: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what representations he has received (a) from and (b) on behalf of small businesses about the coherence of programmes of advice and assistance for small businesses.

Alun Michael: We have received a range of representations concerning the programmes of advice and assistance for small businesses some of which reflect the wish of Ministers to make support for business much simpler and easier to obtain. The CBI's report "Improving Government Services to Small and Growing Businesses", published in January 2006, demonstrated the CBI's support of the Government's objective to ensure services to businesses become more coherent. A report from the Federation of Small Businesses published this month, showed that only 4 per cent. of its members who responded to the survey used the help available from the Business Link network yet 96 per cent. of those who actually use the service would recommend it to a friend—so there is clearly a gap between perception and reality.
	During November 2005, the Association of Chartered Certified Accountants informed the DTI of its concerns with the Government's wider business support agenda and Small Business Service officials recently met the Association to discuss these issues.
	Ministers believe that the proliferation of business support schemes has created a complex picture that makes it difficult and time consuming for businesses to gain access to relevant support and my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State has set in train a process of deproliferation. We will work with the Regional Development Agencies (RDAs) and other local and national bodies to reduce the number of business support services from around 3,000 now, to no more than 100 by 2010. The DTI's Small Business Service will spearhead this cross-Government programme and will engage with a wide range of key stakeholders, including the CBI and ACCA. An announcement of this programme was formally presented in the 2006 Budget report.

Sustainable Development Commission

Peter Law: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what evaluation processes he plans to use to assess the contents and conclusions of the report, "Is Nuclear the Answer?", published by the Sustainable Development Commission on 6 March.

Malcolm Wicks: I welcome the Sustainable Development Commission's analysis and background papers as an important contribution to the debate we are having as part of the Energy Review.
	The Energy Review will take account of the Sustainable Development Commission's analysis, together with other stakeholder contributions and responses to our consultation.

Telephone Service Providers

Charles Hendry: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry how many telephone service providers have had more than 50 complaints made against them for potential breach of telephone preference service regulations.

Alun Michael: The Information Commissioner is responsible for administering the Privacy and Electronic Communications (EC Directive) Regulations 2003. Regulation 21 of these Regulations relates to unsolicited direct marketing telephone calls. Where a complaint is made about a potential breach of Regulation 21, the alleged breach is considered to have been committed by the instigator of the marketing call rather than the telephone service provider who has provided the service by which the call was made. While the Commissioner's Office have received complaints about potential breaches of Regulation 21 which have allegedly been committed by organisations that would be classed as telephone service providers, the nature of the casework management system used makes it impossible to identify the number of telephone service providers about which the ICO has received more than 50 complaints. They are looking to develop this function in their casework management system in the future.

Adult Education

Stewart Jackson: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what funds have been made available for adult education courses in Peterborough in 2005–06; and what percentage change this represents from the previous year.

Bill Rammell: The Department allocates funds for the post-16 education and training sector to the Learning and Skills Council (LSC) working through 47 local offices. The LSC was established in 2001 bringing the planning and funding of post-16 education together under one body within a framework set by Government. In 2005–06 we plan to spend £2,851 million on the main education and training programmes for adults, an increase of £183 million or 7 per cent. on the comparable figure for 2004–05. The Department does not hold figures for adult education funding at local level. Mark Haysom, the council's chief executive has written to my hon. Friend and a copy of his reply has been placed in the House Library.

Adult Education

Helen Jones: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what assessment the Learning and Skills Council has made of the socio-economic status of adult learners in (a) further education and (b) adult and community learning in the academic year (i) 2002–03, (ii) 2003–04 and (iii) 2004–05.

Phil Hope: holding answer 16 March 2006
	I am not aware of any assessment undertaken by the Learning and Skills Council (LSC) of the socio-economic status of adult learners. Mark Haysom, the LSC's chief executive has written to my hon. Friend with further information and a copy of his letter has been placed in the House Library.

Special Educational Needs

Gordon Marsden: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what proportion of children with special educational needs in England are on a school action plan.

Maria Eagle: The following table shows information on pupils in maintained primary, secondary and special schools and non-maintained special schools who are supported at School Action and School Action Plus as part of the graduated approach to meeting the needs of children who have special educational needs (SEN). The table also shows children with SEN but without statements who attend maintained nursery schools, Pupils Referral Units and independent schools.
	
		Number of pupils with special educational needs (SEN) without statements by type of school—January 2005—England
		
			  Number and percentage 
		
		
			 All schools(7):  
			 SEN provision—School Action 801,960 
			 SEN provision—School Action Plus 365,810 
			 SEN provision—stage unknown 63,020 
			 Pupils with SEN without statements 1,230,800 
			 Pupils on roll 8,274,320 
			 Incidence (percentage)(8) 14.9 
			   
			 Maintained schools:  
			 Nursery(9)  
			 Pupils with SEN without statements 4,110 
			 Pupils on roll 37,410 
			 Incidence (percentage)(8) 11.0 
			 Placement (percentage)(10) 0.3 
			   
			 Primary  
			 SEN provision—School Action 468,480 
			 SEN provision—School Action Plus 224,000 
			 Pupils with SEN without statements 692,480 
			 Pupils on roll 4,204,500 
			 Incidence (percentage)(8) 16.5 
			 Placement (percentage)(10) 56.3 
			   
			 Secondary  
			 SEN provision—School Action 333,250 
			 SEN provision—School Action Plus 140,260 
			 Pupils with SEN without statements 473,510 
			 Pupils on roll 3,316,050 
			 Incidence (percentage)(8) 14.3 
			 Placement (percentage)(10) 38.5 
			   
			 Special(7)  
			 SEN provision—School Action 230 
			 SEN provision—School Action Plus 1,520 
			 Pupils with SEN without statements 1,750 
			 Pupils on roll 85,350 
			 Incidence (percentage)(8) 2.1 
			 Placement (percentage)(10) 0.1 
			   
			 Pupil Referral Units(9)(11)(12)  
			 Pupils with SEN without statements 6,540 
			 Pupils on roll 14,470 
			 Incidence (percentage)(8) 45.2 
			 Placement (percentage)(10) 0.5 
			   
			 Other schools:  
			 Independent(9)(13)  
			 Pupils with SEN without statements 52,370 
			 Pupils on roll 611,670 
			 Incidence (percentage)(8) 8.6 
			 Placement (percentage)(10) 4.3 
			   
			 Non-maintained special(11)  
			 SEN provision—School Action 10 
			 SEN provision—School Action Plus 30 
			 Pupils with SEN without statements 40 
			 Pupils on roll 4,870 
			 Incidence (percentage)(8) 0.8 
			 Placement (percentage)(10) 0.0 
		
	
	(7) Excludes general hospital schools. Data for pupils with SEN without statements are not collected from these schools.
	(8) Incidence of pupils—the number of pupils with SEN without statements expressed as a proportion of pupils on roll.
	(9) Information on stage of SEN is not collected from maintained nursery schools, pupil referral units and independent schools.
	(10) Placement of pupils—the number of pupils with SEN without statements expressed as a proportion of pupils with SEN without statements in all schools.
	(11) Excludes dually registered pupils.
	(12) Includes pupils with other providers.
	(13) Including Direct Grant Nursery schools, City Technology Colleges and Academies.
	Note:
	Totals may not appear to equal the sum of the component parts because numbers have been rounded to the nearest 10.
	Source:
	Annual Schools Census.

Correspondence

Gerald Kaufman: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport when she will reply to the letter dated 8 February from the right hon. Member for Manchester, Gorton, with regard to Paul Buckles.

James Purnell: I understand my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State replied to the right hon. Member's letter on the 20 March 2006.

Films

Eric Pickles: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport how much funding from the UK Film Council has been allocated to (a) DNA Films, (b) The Film Consortium and (c) Pathé Productions in each of the last five years.

James Purnell: The UK Film Council was set up in 2000 and took over administration and funding of the existing Arts Council England (ACE) franchises' contractual agreements. Funding has been allocated over the past five years as follows:
	
		
			  The Film Consortium Pathé Productions DNA 
		
		
			 2001 3,253,202 3,588,072 4,401,400 
			 2002 7,574,906 4,813,180 225,000 
			 2003 4,425,897 10,657,799 1,684,089 
			 2004 — — 466,667 
			 2005 — — 13,793,611 
			 Total 15,254,005 19,059,051 20,570,767 
		
	
	The Film Consortium and Pathé Productions had spent their allocations by 2003, so have no spending showing in 2004 or 2005.

Films

Eric Pickles: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport how many films were made by (a) DNA Films, (b) Pathé and (c) The Film Consortium using the £95.67 million funding from the Arts Council between 1997 and 2003; and how many of them made a profit.

James Purnell: 51 feature films were made by DMA Films, Pathé Productions and The Film Consortium using funding from the Arts Council England's film franchises between 1997 and 2003. The total worldwide box office generated by these films to date is in excess of £150 million.
	Many of these films generated box office in excess of their production costs. As the UK Film Council does not have access to the details of the films individual marketing spend worldwide or the revenues generated worldwide from their continued exploitation through video, dvd and television medium, it is not possible to calculate any profit made by these films.

Films

Eric Pickles: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport how many films which have received funding from the UK Film Council in the last 10 years have (a) broken even, (b) made a profit and (c) made a loss.

James Purnell: Since, the UK Film Council was set up in 2000, it has funded 117 films. While many of these films generated box office in excess of their production costs, the UK Film Council does not have access to the details of the films individual marketing spend worldwide or the revenues generated worldwide from their continued exploitation through video, DVD and television. This information would be needed before the break even point of a film could be calculated.

Financial Irregularities

Anne Main: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport pursuant to the answer of 17 March 2006, Official Report, column 2520W, on financial irregularities, how much was involved in each case.

David Lammy: The information is in the following table.
	
		
			  Financial year Financial irregularities  Costs (£) 
		
		
			 2000–01 0 0 
			 2001–02 1 1,823 
			 2002–03 2 3,200 and 1,100 
			 2003–04 (14)1 (15)40,000 
			 2004–05 0 0 
		
	
	(14) In the RPA.
	(15) This case was identified during 2003–04, which may have been ongoing for several years. The cost was an estimate of the maximum loss.

FM Radio Contracts

Gary Streeter: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport 
	(1)  what assessment she has made of the recent decision by the Office of Communication to award the new FM radio contract for Plymouth to Diamond FM, an Australian-based company in preference to bids from local companies; and whether she plans to intervene;
	(2)  what powers she has to set aside or amend decisions made by the Office of Communications on the awarding of FM radio contracts.

James Purnell: holding answer 21 March 2006
	These are matters for Ofcom under legislation. They have published an assessment of the winning application.

National Lottery

Mike Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what account is taken of levels of deprivation in particular areas in allocating Lottery grants.

Richard Caborn: Distributors of National Lottery funding are required to comply with relevant legislation and policy directions issued by the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport. These differ for each distributor but generally require them to take into account the scope for reducing economic and social deprivation at the same time as creating benefits for the sector in which they operate.
	The largest programme to address deprivation has been "fair share", operated by the former Community Fund and New Opportunities Fund. With a total value of £179 million, including a £50 million 10-year expendable endowment, many rural areas, former coalfield areas and seaside towns have already benefited.

Official Guests (Chequers)

Norman Baker: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list the guests he has officially entertained at Chequers since 1 May 2005.

Tony Blair: A list of those who have attended official dinners at Chequers since May 2005 is set out as follows:
	25 June 2005
	Sir Ewan Harper CBE
	Lady Jenny Harper
	Professor Sir Ara Darzi KBE
	Lady Darzi
	Mr. Steve Knight
	Ms Catherine Neale
	Mr. Richard Granger
	Mrs. Gabrielle Granger
	Mr. Paul Evans
	Mrs. Karen Evans
	Ms Naomi Eisenstadt CB
	Mr. Michael Moutrie
	The right hon. John Hutton MP
	Mrs. Heather Hutton
	Mr. Martin Newlands
	Mrs. Benedicte Newlands
	10 December 2005
	Mr. Mark Kurd
	Mrs. Paula Hurd
	Mr. Lee Scott
	Mrs. Linda Scott
	The right hon. David Miliband MP
	Ms Louise Shackleton
	Lord Coe KBE
	Ms Carole Annett
	Mr. Anthony Minghella CBE
	Ms Carolyn Choa
	Dr. Beverley Malone
	Ms Barbara Stocking CBE
	Dr. John Mclnnes
	Mr. John O'Farrell
	Mrs. Jackie O'Farrell
	4 February 2006
	The right hon. Hazel Blears MP
	Mr. Michael Hasall
	Mr. Brian Barwick
	Mrs. Geraldine Barwick
	Mr. John Sunderland
	Sir Terry Leahy
	Lady Leahy
	Professor Michael Richards CBE
	Professor Phil Redmond CBE
	Mrs. Alexis Redmond
	Mrs. Jeanie Sunderland
	Ms Nancy Hallett OBE

Clean Neighbourhoods and Environment Act

David Taylor: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs when she plans to issue guidance to local authorities on the implementation of the Clean Neighbourhoods and Environment Act 2005.

Ben Bradshaw: In week commencing 27 March 2006 the guidance on the Clean Neighbourhoods and Environment Act will be sent to all local authorities and will also be available onDefra's local environmental quality website www.defra.gov.uk/environment/localenv/index.htm.

Disposable Plastic Shopping Bags

Mark Oaten: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what steps she is taking to reduce the use of disposable plastic shopping bags.

Ben Bradshaw: holding answer 23 March 2006
	Government has been looking at ways of reducing the usage of disposal plastic shopping bags by encouraging reuse. Last Autumn, WRAP (the Waste and Resources Action Programme) conducted a 'Reusable Bag' campaign trial, which took place in Bristol and Edinburgh in association with supermarket retailers, Defra, the Scottish Executive, the British Retail Consortium and the Scottish Waste Awareness Group. Customers were asked to "Choose to reuse" any kind of durable shopping bag for their supermarket shop, and remember to bring it with them to store, in an effort to curb carrier bag take-up. WRAP are hoping to publish the results of the campaign by Easter.

Energy Efficiency

David Drew: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what plans she has to improve energy efficiency in public buildings, with particular reference to dealing with appliances left on standby.

Elliot Morley: The Governments approach is to set targets for carbon reduction or energy efficiency in key operational areas whilst allowing public bodies the flexibility in terms of the mechanisms used to deliver those targets. The Government also provides support and advice to public sector organisations through mechanisms such as the Carbon Trust, a private company funded by Government, which takes the lead on public sector carbon reduction. The Trust can provide support and practical advice on a range of measures (which includes no and low cost measures such as not leaving equipment on standby) to help them meet their commitments.

Flood Prevention

John Gummer: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what proportion of expenditure by (a) the Environment Agency and (b) other operating authorities in each year since 2003–04 was spent on the maintenance of tidal river and coastal defences (a) in England, (b) in the Anglian region and (c) on the Suffolk coast including the Stour and Orwell.

Elliot Morley: The information is as follows:
	Environment Agency
	The Environment Agency's expenditure on maintenance and operation of tidal river and coastal defences as a percentage of total overall spend on all flood risk management activities nationally (maintenance, capital improvement, flood warning etc) is:
	
		Percentage
		
			  2003–04 2004–05 2005–06(16) 
		
		
			 England 5.7 3.4 5.6 
			 Environment Agency Anglian region 1.9 1.9 1.9 
			 Suffolk 0.3 0.4 0.4 
		
	
	(16) Based on expenditure forecasts, not actual expenditure
	Local Authorities
	Councils' expenditure on flood defence and coast protection, including maintenance work, is included in annual returns to the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister who in turn support such expenditure. Councils' flood defence expenditure is not differentiated between coastal and inland waters but is likely to be predominantly spent on inland waters. The following table therefore relates to local authorities' "own spend" data on coast protection i.e. works against erosion or encroachment by the sea as compared against the total of this "own spend" plus any expenditure notified to DEFRA by the councils in regular returns of spend on DEFRA grant-aided coastal capital improvement projects.
	
		Percentage
		
			  2003–04 2004–05 2005–06(17) 
		
		
			 National 20 19 16 
			 Environment Agency Anglian Region(18) 53 64 35 
			 Suffolk(19) 33 64 35 
		
	
	(17) Based on expenditure forecasts, not actual expenditure
	(18) Coastal councils between North Lincolnshire and Thurrock
	(19) Suffolk Coastal, Waveney and Tendring district councils

Fly-tipping

Michael Wills: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how many incidents of fly-tipping (a) were reported and (b) led to a prosecution in Swindon in each year since 1997; and if she will make a statement.

Ben Bradshaw: Defra has worked with the Environment Agency to establish a national database on fly-tipping (Flycapture) which has been operational since April 2004. No national data were previously available on illegal waste disposal or fly-tipping. Flycapture collects data at local authority level only.
	It is important to note that the data are probably an underestimate and will increase as authorities get better at collecting and reporting the data.
	Swindon borough council reported 2,604 incidents of fly-tipping between April 2004 and March 2005 (average of 217 per month) and 1,427 between April 2005 and January 2006 (average 143 per month). During the same time periods the Environment Agency investigated three and seven incidents respectively.
	Prosecution data is only available from April 2005 to January 2006, during this period no prosecutions were reported by Swindon borough council, the Environment Agency took two prosecutions (one fine of £150 and one lost case).

H5N1

Jim Cunningham: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what information she has received on the length of time that H5N1 was present in each infected EU country before it was discovered.

Ben Bradshaw: Information currently available from EU countries affected by H5N1 does not include the length of time that the virus was present before detection.
	We remain in close contact with our EU counterparts as we continue to monitor the situation.

Pesticides

Angela Smith: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs which pesticides harmful to wildlife she plans to add to the list of those which cannot be held without lawful reason.

Elliot Morley: Clause 43(1) of the Natural Environment and Rural Communities Bill will make it an offence to be in possession of a pesticide containing an ingredient prescribed by Order of the Secretary of State, unless possession is for purposes in accordance with relevant pesticide legislation.
	Potential candidates for inclusion in the Order will be identified in consultation with key stakeholders after the Bill has become law.

Pesticides

Michael Meacher: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs pursuant to the answer of 19 December 2005, Official Report, column 2015W, on pesticides and paragraph 1.2, page 4 of the Advisory Committee on Pesticides' Commentary on the report published by the Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution (RCEP) in September 2005, which bodies (a) the Department of Health and (b) the Health and Safety Executive have suggested should be asked to comment on the RCEP report, Crop spraying and the health of residents and bystanders; if she will place in the Library the correspondence and other records in which such requests were made; from which bodies such submissions were received; and when each was received.

Elliot Morley: The Government are seeking comments on the RCEP report from their independent scientific advisory committees; the Advisory Committee on Pesticides (ACP), the Committee on Toxicity, the Committee on Mutagenicity and the Committee on Carcinogenicity. The ACP's commentary has been published on its website. No formal consultation of external organisations has taken place.

Pollution Prevention and Control System

Nadine Dorries: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what steps the Government are taking to decrease the amount of nitrous oxide gases emitted into the atmosphere; what mechanisms are in place to monitor emissions; and if she will make a statement.

Elliot Morley: UK nitrous oxide emissions are monitored via the UK's Greenhouse Gas Inventory, which is published annually. Between 1990 and 2004 (the most recent year for which figures are available) the inventory shows that nitrous oxide emissions fell by about 40 per cent.
	The main sources of nitrous oxide are agriculture and industrial processes including manufacture of adipic and nitric acids. Under the Integrated Pollution Control (IPC) system introduced by the Environmental Protection Act, DuPont (UK) Ltd., the operators of the only adipic acid plant in the UK, introduced an abatement unit that reduced nitrous oxide emissions from their plant by over 95 per cent. This is estimated to have reduced UK greenhouse gas emissions by 6.5 million tonnes of carbon equivalent, equal to about 3 per cent. of 1990 greenhouse gas emissions. The Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control (IPPC) system which is now superseding IPC will drive further reductions including at nitric acid plant.
	In the agriculture sector nitrous oxide emissions fell by 17 per cent. between 1990 and 2004, and are expected to continue to fall. A range of options to reduce emissions from the sector are being considered through the Climate Change Programme Review and development of the Adaptation Policy Framework.
	As part of a resource efficient approach to farm management, we are promoting actions to optimise fertiliser use, as well as measures to improve management of manure, nutrients and soil. Additionally, activities under a range of Defra initiative, such as Catchment Sensitive Farming, can help to reduce greenhouse gas emissions while addressing other environmental issues. Defra is seeking to maximize the benefits of these policies in delivery of climate change objectives.

Pollution Prevention and Control System

James Duddridge: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what the administrative costs of the Pollution Prevention and Control System have been in each year since 1997.

Ben Bradshaw: holding answer 17 March 2006
	The Pollution Prevention and Control (PPC) system was set up by the Pollution Prevention and Control (England and Wales) Regulations 2000 and encompasses (i) regulation by the Environment Agency of industrial installations subject to the requirements of the Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control (IPPC) Directive, and (ii) regulation by local authorities of some 23,000 generally smaller industrial installations in respect of their emissions to air. Local authorities are also responsible for the regulation of about 10 per cent. of the some 4,500 installations subject to IPPC.
	These regulators recover their costs through charges made to each operator who holds a permit issued under the PPC system. The income from these charges is set out in the tables which cover the annual periods from 2000 in which year the PPC Regulations came into force. The increasing income to the Environment Agency arises because installations subject to IPPC requirements are being phased into the new system according to a timetable laid down in the PPC Regulations extending from late 2000 to early 2007. Many of those installations were already subject to integrated pollution control under the system introduced by the Environmental Protection Act 1990 and which IPPC is superseding. The local authority income from charges does not vary so much from year to year because it includes income from the predecessor controls under Part I of the Environmental Protection Act 1990.
	While these charges account for a large part of the administrative costs of the PPC system, operators may also incur costs directly in preparing applications for permits and, on a recurring basis, responding to routine monitoring and other information requirements of their permits. No estimates of these on an annual basis are available.
	
		Total Environment Agency income from application fees and annual charges 2000–05
		
			 April-March Income £ million 
		
		
			 2000–01 0.0 
			 2001–02 1.5 
			 2002–03 3.0 
			 2003–04 12.5 
			 2004–05 21.8 
		
	
	
		Total local authority income from application fees and annual charges 2000–05
		
			 April-March Income £ million 
		
		
			 2000–01 9.1 
			 2001–02 8.9 
			 2002–03 8.3 
			 2003–04 8.0 
			 2004–05 8.8

Recycling

Jessica Morden: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs whether her Department has conducted research into the effect on recycling rates of decreasing the (a) frequency of kerbside refuse collection and (b) volume of kerbside refuse collected.

Ben Bradshaw: Defra has not conducted research into the effects of introducing alternate weekly collection (AWC)of household waste. However, the Government funded Waste and Resources Action Programme (WRAP), published guidance for local authorities on the introduction of AWC last year.
	This guide draws on the experiences of the hundred or so local authorities that have introduced AWC and uses 12 case studies covering all aspects of implementing AWC by way of illustration. The guide states
	'Experience from other authorities suggests that recycling and participation levels increase and that kerbside waste arisings decrease as a direct result of the introduction of AWC'.
	It goes on
	'Local authorities have reported average increases in participation levels of 15 per cent. to 20 per cent. but some have been as high as 95 per cent.'
	Some authorities have reported a reduction in total waste collected of between 4.5 per cent. and 13 per cent. Vale Royal borough council is quoted as follows
	"The introduction of a borough-wide kerbside recycling scheme coinciding with a move to alternate weekly collections has helped us move from a 15 per cent. recycling rate in 2003–04 to a level of 40 per cent. in 2004–05".

Small Firms

Mark Prisk: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what definition her Department uses of a small firm.

Elliot Morley: There is no single definition of a small firm with terms such as 'small firm' and 'SME' (small and medium sized enterprise) being used interchangeably. However, two of the most common definitions are those provided by the European Union and the Companies Act 1985. These definitions can be found at http://europa.eu.int/comm/enterprise/enterprise_policy/sme_ definition/index_en.htm and http://www.dti.gov.uk/cld/audit.htm.

Waste Disposal

James Duddridge: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what recent representations she has received on the possible (a) environmental and (b) health impacts of waste incinerators.

Ben Bradshaw: holding answer 23 March 2006
	I have recently received several hundred letters from hon. Members and members of the public expressing either support for or concern about waste incineration. Most of them are the result of a campaign by Friends of the Earth and raise the concern that increased incineration will prevent higher levels of recycling, but make no reference to health impacts. These issues are addressed in the current waste strategy review consultation.

Waste Implementation Programme

Michael Jack: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs whether she expects her Department's Waste Implementation Programme to meet all its targets and objectives within the published timetable for action; and if she will make a statement.

Ben Bradshaw: The Waste Implementation Programme has two overarching targets. Firstly to work with stakeholders, particularly local authorities to insure that our national recycling and composting targets are met. The 2003–04 target of 17 per cent. was exceeded and we are confident that the 2005–06 target of 25 per cent. will be met, although figures are not yet available. WIP's second overarching target is to create the conditions in which the investment needed to meet our 2010, 2013 and 2020 landfill directive targets can take place. This remains a highly challenging objective but we are confident that good progress is being made toward achieving it.

Gambia

Andrew Tyrie: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what (a) meetings and (b) telephone conversations took place during October to December 2002 between British officials and (i) US and (ii) Gambian officials where matters relating to (A) Bisher al Rawi, (B) Wahab al Rawi and (C) Jamil el Banna were discussed; and what matters were discussed on each occasion.

Kim Howells: The issues raised are currently the subject of legal proceedings. It would therefore be inappropriate to comment at this time.

Gambia

Andrew Tyrie: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what correspondence has been exchanged between British officials and (a) Gambian and (b) US officials where matters relating to (i) Bisher al Rawi, (ii) Wahab al Rawi and (iii) Jamil el Banna were mentioned.

Kim Howells: The issues raised are currently the subject of legal proceedings. It would therefore be inappropriate to comment at this time.

Palestinian Authority

Iain Wright: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what assessment his Department has made of the conditions under which Palestinian prisoners were being held in Jericho Prison by the Palestinian prison authorities.

Kim Howells: The Palestinian Authority were responsible for the conditions under which the Palestinian prisoners were being held. The UK and US monitors role was to monitor that the six Palestinian detainees were held in continuous seclusion.

Uganda

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what assessment he has made of reports that Land Systems OMC sold arms to Uganda; and what steps are being taken by his Department to address such arms transfers.

Ian Pearson: Land Systems OMC, is a South African based company in which BAE Systems has a 75 per cent. shareholding. We are aware of reports that Land Systems OMC has sold armoured vehicles to the Ugandan Government. Uganda is not an embargoed destination and the UK did not approve export licences for these vehicles. Overseas subsidiaries are subject to the export controls of the country in which they operate.
	Armoured vehicles were used on several occasions to police the recent elections, but we have not been able to substantiate the allegations that they were used to violate human rights.
	Armoured vehicles are also used by the Ugandan armed forces to escort convoys in the north of the country where there is a long-running and very violent incursion by the Lord's Resistance army. Food convoys are essential to sustain the 1.7 million people living in internally displaced people's camps in the region.

Surplus Military Equipment

David Heathcoat-Amory: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will revise the rules relating to the disposal of surplus military equipment to ensure that such equipment is not put to inappropriate end use.

Adam Ingram: Every sale is subject to rigorous terms and conditions including, for Government-to-Government sales, the requirement to seek approval for any subsequent sale or transfer. Equipment intended for the commercial market is declassified and demilitarised as appropriate prior to sale. The rules for the disposal of surplus military equipment are kept under constant review and were there to be a strong justification, they could be adapted.

Army Restructuring

Christopher Fraser: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on Army restructuring.

Adam Ingram: Work is already underway on restructuring the Army. 19 Mechanised Brigade has already formed up as a Light Brigade while four Armoured Brigade will re-role as a Mechanised Brigade by the end of the year. The majority of changes to the infantry will be implemented by Spring 2007 whilst the key foundations on which the future Army structure is to be built will be in place by the end of 2008.

Cadet Corps (Rifles)

David Borrow: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many of the (a) DP and (b) GP rifles used by (i) army cadets, (ii) sea cadets and (iii) air cadets are in good working condition.

Adam Ingram: Information about the condition of individual weapons held by cadet units is not held centrally and could be provided only at disproportionate cost.

Chinook

John Spellar: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence pursuant to his Written Statement of 16 February 2006, Official Report, column 113W, on Chinook support, whether the Defence Aviation Repair Agency sub-contract with Boeing for through-life customer support of the Chinook helicopter fleet will be extended to cover contracts with other countries' Chinook fleets.

Adam Ingram: No. The Through Life Customer Support contract covers through life maintenance, repair and overhaul for only the UK RAF's Chinook fleet.

QinetiQ

Gerald Howarth: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on his Department's special share in QinetiQ.

John Reid: I can confirm that in recent highly successful QinetiQ initial public offering, in addition to receiving proceeds of £347 million for the tax payer and maintaining access to cutting-edge technology for our armed forces, the Government have retained a special share in QinetiQ to protect the defence or security interests of the UK.

Correspondence

Peter Bone: To ask the Leader of the House if he bring forward guidelines for Ministers on responding to written requests from hon. Members for meetings and information.

Geoff Hoon: Existing guidance emphasises that it is essential that MPs receive carefully considered and prompt responses to correspondence. Ministers will give proper consideration to any requests for a meeting with hon. Members and for information. It must however be a matter for judgment as to whether a meeting would be possible in the particular circumstances of each case and this is not something on which precise guidance can be given.

Asylum and Immigration Tribunal

Keith Vaz: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Constitutional Affairs when she last met Sir Henry Hodge, President of the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal; and if she will make a statement.

Bridget Prentice: I last met with Mr Justice Hodge on 1 February of this year to discuss the role of non-legal members in the Tribunal.

Constituency Populations

Peter Bone: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Constitutional Affairs if she will take steps to equalise the populations of constituencies.

Bridget Prentice: The independent Parliamentary Boundary Commissions review parliamentary boundaries every 8 to12 years. Although the electoral quota is important, it is necessary to take other factors into account, such as geographical and community issues. The Parliamentary Boundary Commissions considers all these factors when conducting their review.

Court Adjournments

Keith Vaz: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Constitutional Affairs what steps are being taken to mitigate the cost effects on the criminal justice system of (a) security companies producing prisoners late at court and (b) courts over-listing cases resulting in unnecessary adjournments.

Harriet Harman: The CJS is seeking to further improve prisoner delivery to court and mitigate the cost of late arrivals. This will be achieved through the increased procurement of prison video link equipment, thus reducing the volume of prisoners attending court in person, and the improving prisoner availability project (IPAP).
	The number of ineffective trials due to over-listing in the Crown court and the magistrates' court since 2002–03 has declined as a result of action taken by the courts in liaison with CJS partners. Performance is monitored.

Departmental Telephone Numbers

Anne Milton: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Constitutional Affairs pursuant to the answer of 8 March 2006, Official Report, columns 1576–8W, on departmental telephone numbers, what service each (a) 0800, (b) 0845 and (c) 0870 telephone number maintained by the Department for Constitutional Affairs provides; and what revenue was obtained from (i) 0845 and (ii) 0870 numbers maintained by her Department in the last period for which figures are available.

Bridget Prentice: For 2004–05, the revenue obtained from (i) 0845 telephone numbers was £236.81 and (ii) 0870 numbers was £174,945.21.
	My Department does not hold central records of the services provided by each of the numbers. That information could now be obtained only at disproportionate cost.

Inquiries Act

Joan Humble: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Constitutional Affairs if she will list the inquiries (a) converted to and (b) initiated under the Inquiries Act 2005 since its commencement; what the completion date or estimated completion date is of each; and what the budget or final cost of each inquiry is, broken down by the categories proposed in Article 12 (2)(b) of the draft Inquiry Procedure (UK Inquiries) Rules.

Harriet Harman: On 23 November 2005 the Billy Wright inquiry was converted, by the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland the right hon. Peter Hain MP, to an inquiry to be held under the Inquiries Act 2005. Information on the budget and timetable for this inquiry is still being formulated and is not currently available.
	Acting in accordance with its powers under section 1 of the Inquiries Act 2005, a motion was passed on 7 December 2005 in the plenary session of the National Assembly for Wales to cause an inquiry into the E.coli outbreak in South Wales in September 2005.
	On 16 November 2004 the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, Paul Murphy, announced the terms of reference for the inquiry into the death of Robert Hamill following an incident in Portadown, County Armagh on 27 April 1997. The inquiry is being held under section 44 of the Police (Northern Ireland) Act 1998.
	The web-site for the Hamill Inquiry sets out that:
	"The Chairman of the Robert Hamill inquiry has come to the view that the limitations on the inquiry's powers of compulsion contained in the Police (Northern Ireland) Act 1998 Act, coupled with the clear indications that important witnesses are unwilling to give evidence, point powerfully to a decision to convert the inquiry to one that should be constituted under the Inquiries Act 2005."
	To this end, the Chairman has written to the Permanent Secretary, Jonathan Phillips, at the Northern Ireland Office.
	At this time, no other inquiries have yet been established under the Inquiries Act.
	The draft inquiry procedure (UK inquiries) rules are currently out to public consultation, which began on 1 March and will end on 23 May 2006.

Notaries

Oliver Heald: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Constitutional Affairs which EU states allow notaries public from England and Wales to practise within their legal system.

Bridget Prentice: No EU member state allows notaries public from England and Wales to practice within their legal system.
	All notarial appointments are limited to the jurisdiction in which the notary qualified.

Small Firms

Mark Prisk: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Constitutional Affairs what definition the Department uses of a small firm.

Harriet Harman: There is no single definition of a small firm with terms such as "small firm" and "SME" (small and medium-sized enterprise) being used interchangeably.
	When completing the Small Business Service Annual Survey for HM Treasury, my Department uses the Treasury definition of an organisation with 249 or less full-time employees (or equivalent).
	My officials follow the central guidance on regulatory impact assessments, including its suggestion that any business with less than 250 employees should be considered small.

Blind Pupils (Education Achievement)

Sammy Wilson: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland how many pupils in Northern Ireland assessed as blind left school with (a) five or more and (b) no GCSE passes in each of the last three years.

Angela Smith: Figures for 2004–05 are not yet available. Out of a total of 15 children with a statement of special educational needs who were recorded as blind and who left school in the previous three years, seven achieved five or more GCSE's at grades A*-G, and six achieved no GCSE's. Because of the very small numbers in any one year, it is not appropriate to break the figures down into individual years.

Causeway IT

John Spellar: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will make a statement on progress on the Causeway IT programme.

David Hanson: The Causeway Programme is a joint enterprise by the six criminal justice organisations in Northern Ireland that aims to improve their performance by sharing information electronically. The programme is being implemented in phases.
	Phase 1 the Criminal Justice Viewer, was implemented on time and within budget in March 2004.
	Phase 2 Electronic Case Preparation—which enables the electronic transfer of information between the police, prosecution and forensic services—went live on 13 June 2005. To date some 40,000 PSNI investigation cases have been placed on the Causeway system with approximately 13,000 of these being shared with the Public Prosecution Service (PPS). There have been over 11,000 shares of forensic test requests and reports between forensic scientists, the police and prosecution lawyers. Over the course of the year Causeway is expected to have removed from circulation some 6 million pieces of paper.
	Examples of other tangible benefits already delivered include:
	A reduction in the average time taken by police officers in Omagh to prepare a case from 70 to 29 days.
	The release of 33 police officers from administrative duties back to the beat.
	A reduction in the time taken by probation officers to check a criminal record from 2–3 weeks to a few seconds.
	The programme is currently working on phase 3, in which the Northern Ireland Court Service and the Prison Service will join the system. Recently the Compensation Agency, Youth Justice Agency and the Police Ombudsman's Office have been provided with access to on-line criminal records. The programme is also examining the feasibility of linking into the Police National Computer. In addition to winning a national award for promoting joined up government, Causeway was recently cited by HM Treasury as an example of best practice in risk management.

Charter Mark

Gregory Campbell: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland how many charter marks were awarded to public sector (a) offices and (b) departments in Northern Ireland in 2005.

Angela Smith: The information is not available in the format requested. However, I can confirm that 43 Charter Marks were achieved by 17 public sector organisations in Northern Ireland in 2005. In addition, four Charter Marks were achieved by voluntary sector organisations which deliver public services. A list of all Northern Ireland organisations which achieved Charter Mark in 2005 is as follows:
	
		
			 Organisation Office 
		
		
			 St. Mary's College, Creggan  
			 Compensation Agency  
			 North and West Belfast Trust Assisted Living Scheme 
			  Muckamore Abbey 
			 Mid Ulster Hospital Children's Unit 
			  Hotel Services Department 
			 Newry and Mourne Health and Social Services Trust Direct Access Haematuria Service 
			  Paediatric Diabetes Service 
			 Down District Council Downpatrick and Newcastle Tourist Information Centres 
			  Building Control 
			 General Register Office Northern Ireland Statistics and Research Agency (NISRA) 
			 North Eastern Education and Library Board Library Service 
			  Antrim District Office 
			  Collon Terrace District Office, Londonderry 
			  Armagh District Office 
			  Belfast 6 District Office 
			  Carrickfergus District Office 
			  Cookstown District Office 
			  Downpatrick District Office 
			  Lurgan Brownlow District Office 
			  Omagh District Office 
			 Northern Ireland Housing Executive Ballyclare Grants Office 
			  Ballymoney District Office 
			  Banbridge District Office 
			  Bangor District Office 
			  Belfast South and East Grants Office 
			  Limavady District Office 
			  Magherafelt District Office 
			  Newtownabbey District 2 Office 
			  Newtownards District Office 
			  Omagh Grants Office 
			  Waterside District Office 
			 Ards Borough Council Ards Crafts, Ards and Portaferry Tourist Information Centres 
			 Cookstown Tourist Information Centre  
			 Whiteabbey Hospital Day Rehabilitation Unit 
			 Ulidia Housing Association Ltd.(21)  
			 Action Mental Health(21) New Horizons Fermanagh 
			 Causeway Health and Social Services Trust Domestic Services Department 
			 Down Lisburn Health and Social Services Trust (Corporate Charter Mark)  
			 Department of Education Education and Training Inspectorate 
			 Northern Ireland Association for Mental Health(21)  
			  Antrim Court Office 
			  Armagh Court Office 
			  Ballymena Court Office 
			  Banbridge Court Office 
			  Court Funds Office 
			 Northern Ireland Court Service Dungannon Court Office 
			  Enniskillen Court Office 
			  Limavady Court Office 
			  Lisburn Court Office 
			  Magherafelt Court Office 
			  Newry Court Office 
			  Strabane Court Office 
			 Royal Victoria Hospital Regional Endocrinology and Diabetes Centre 
			 Springfield Charitable Association(21)  
		
	
	(21) Voluntary Sector Organisations

Civil Service

Mark Durkan: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland how many civil servants in Northern Ireland receive (a) the minimum wage and (b) up to £1 per hour more than the minimum wage.

Angela Smith: All members of the Northern Ireland civil service are paid above the national minimum wage, 4,785 Northern Ireland civil servants receive a wage up to £1 more than the national minimum wage of £5.05 per hour.

Coastal Protection Schemes

Iris Robinson: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland which department is responsible for coastal protection schemes (a) where there is a (i) road and (ii) promenade interest and (b) related to (A) tourism and (B) harbours.

Angela Smith: Coastal protection schemes may include measures to combat erosion and also construction and maintenance of defences against tidal flooding.
	1. The Departments responsible for coastal protection schemes dealing with erosion threatening the specified interests are:
	(a)(i) Roads—Department for Regional Development (for roads adopted into the public road network).
	(ii) Promenades—Department for Regional Development (for promenades adopted into the public road network).
	(b)(A) Tourism—Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment.
	(B) Harbours—Department for Regional Development, Donaghadee harbour only.
	Department of Agriculture and Rural Development—Fisheries Harbours only.
	2. DARD, Rivers Agency is responsible for maintenance of designated sea defences providing protection against tidal flooding.

Deprivation Taskforce

Gregory Campbell: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland when he expects to be in a position to announce the outcome of the taskforce he established to bring forward proposals to deal with deprivation and educational under-achievement in Unionist areas.

David Hanson: The Taskforce to Address the Needs of Protestant Working Class Areas reported to me as Minister with responsibility for Social development, in late 2005. Since that time, I have personally undertaken extensive consultation with civil and elected representatives of the Protestant community in order to test the conclusions of the taskforce in the community.
	I am currently working closely with the senior civil service officials to finalise a positive agenda for action on tackling disadvantage, with a particular emphasis on Protestant working class communities. A Government announcement on this issue will take place in early April. A delivery team, lead by Nigel Hamilton, head of the Northern Ireland Civil Service, has been appointed to drive forward this important work.

Driving Offences

Gregory Campbell: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland whether the Police Service for Northern Ireland plans to provide a single form under the conditional fixed penalty to establish who was driving at the time of the offence as well as offering the offending driver the option of a fixed penalty or proceed to court.

Shaun Woodward: There are currently two forms sent out under the Conditional Fixed Penalty Policy-the 'Notice of Intention to prosecute', which asks the owner to confirm who was driving the vehicle, and the 'Conditional Offer'. The amalgamation of the two forms was recommended in a recent internal review of the Fixed Penalty Processing Centre. PSNI is currently working on implementing this with the Northern Ireland Court Service.

Economic Inactivity

Chris Ruane: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what the economic inactivity rates were for each parliamentary constituency in Northern Ireland in each of the last 20 years.

Angela Smith: The labour force survey can be used to provide economic inactivity rates by Northern Ireland parliamentary constituency area, however, these estimates are only available on a consistent basis from 1995 onwards (see following table).
	
		Working age economic inactivity rates(22)by parliamentary constituency area, spring 1995 to spring 2005 Percentage
		
			 Parliamentary constituency area 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 
		
		
			 Belfast East 25 21 25 33 35 25 21 22 24 28 22 
			 Belfast North 44 40 36 29 30 32 32 32 33 34 40 
			 Belfast South 34 25 27 25 31 34 24 23 26 40 28 
			 Belfast West 44 49 45 42 43 51 46 47 45 46 38 
			 East Antrim 16 24 26 26 19 25 24 20 19 17 17 
			 East Londonderry 31 32 31 25 26 37 32 35 19 33 30 
			 Fermanagh and South Tyrone 33 27 26 29 30 28 28 29 29 27 34 
			 Foyle 33 30 40 35 34 35 37 38 42 38 36 
			 Lagan Valley 24 23 22 25 21 27 20 27 26 22 18 
			 Mid-Ulster 30 37 28 31 27 31 34 30 28 31 32 
			 Newry and Armagh 31 34 30 26 31 32 30 30 33 33 32 
			 North Antrim 33 28 20 28 27 21 23 23 23 30 23 
			 North Down 20 28 19 21 25 22 22 26 21 21 26 
			 South Antrim 19 17 27 21 22 22 18 17 16 27 25 
			 South Down 27 24 23 28 24 29 28 27 22 29 27 
			 Strangford 21 18 20 20 24 34 28 29 24 27 26 
			 Upper Bann 25 29 26 26 29 26 27 31 31 27 27 
			 West Tyrone 40 36 33 35 36 36 42 37 23 32 33 
			 Northern Ireland 29 29 28 28 28 30 29 29 27 30 29 
		
	
	(22) The working age economic inactivity rate is equal to the number of people who are neither in employment nor unemployed as a percentage of the total population of working age. Working age is taken as ages 16 to 59 for females and 16 to 64 for males.
	Note:
	Estimates for parliamentary constituency areas are based on relatively small sample sizes and are therefore subject to a higher degree of sampling variability. They should therefore be treated with caution and, in particular, changes from year-to-year should not be used in isolation from the figures for a run of years.
	Source:
	Labour Force Survey, spring (March–May) quarters of each year.

Fishing Licences

Gregory Campbell: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what the change was in the number of fishing licences awarded for use in the Foyle catchment area between 1995 and 2005.

Angela Smith: The changes in the number of fishing licences awarded for use in the Foyle catchment area between 1995 and 2005 are as follows:
	
		
			  Rod Commercial Total 
		
		
			 1995 4,753 168 4,921 
			 1996 +1,385 -6 +1,379 
			 1997 +1,352 -11 +1,341 
			 1998 +2,328 -9 +2,319 
			 1999 +1,919 -18 +1,901 
			 2000 +1,467 -19 +1,488 
			 2001 +1,504 -23 +1,481 
			 2002 +2,577 -22 +2,555 
			 2003 +3,765 -17 +3,748 
			 2004 +4,974 -28 +4,946 
			 2005 +6,019 -18 +6,001 
		
	
	Notes:
	1. 1995 is used as the baseline with the change indicated as a comparison with this figure.
	2. Rod licences issued b the Foyle, Carlingford and Irish Lights Commission (since its creation in December 1999) entitle the holder to fish in both the Foyle and Carlingford areas. Before the creation of the FCILC, licences were issued by its predecessor, the Foyle Fisheries Commission, and related to the Foyle area only.

Illegal Dumping Unit

Alasdair McDonnell: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what measures his Department is taking to reduce the occurrence of illegal dumping in Northern Ireland.

Angela Smith: The Environment and Heritage Service of the Department of the Environment has a dedicated enforcement team which investigates incidents of illegal dumping and prepares cases, where appropriate, for the Public Prosecution Service (PPS). PPS is sending more cases to the Crown court for trial, which both recognises the severity of the offence, and imposes increasingly heavy fines, such as the £50,000 fine imposed on a Cookstown man in September 2005.
	The introduction of the "flycapture" database, on which all district councils record all incidents of fly-tipping, will strengthen the pool of shared intelligence allowing joint action to tackle serious incidents and serious offenders.
	The Department continues to work closely and successfully with other enforcement agencies and following public consultation will seek to introduce strengthened legislative powers, by the end of 2006, to restrain further this criminal activity.

Industrial De-rating

Alasdair McDonnell: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will assess the impact on businesses in Northern Ireland of the end of industrial de-rating.

Angela Smith: The phasing out of industrial de-rating, which was folly consulted on as part of the overall Review of Rating Policy, came into operation on 1 April 2005 when businesses entitled to industrial de-rating became liable for rates at 15 per cent. of their full rate assessment. It will be 1 April 2011 before businesses will have to pay-full rates. By that stage they will have had some eight years since the first announcement was made to remove industrial de-rating to prepare for full rate liability.
	Given that the policy has been in operation for only one year it is not practical to forecast what the final impact of the removal will be. However, as with all new policies, the Government will review the removal of industrial de-rating and in this case a reasonable period of time is considered to be two years from the date of implementation, ie beginning in April 2007.

Invest Northern Ireland

Gregory Campbell: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what the (a) nature and (b) extent of Invest Northern Ireland's involvement with the Farm Fed Chickens Company (i) was before and (ii) has been since the announcement of the closure of the company.

Angela Smith: Invest NI has worked closely with Farm Fed Chickens both before and after the announcement of their closure.
	The most recent Financial Assistance Agreement offered to the company was in July 1996 offering support totalling £762,000. In 1999 financial assistance was also offered under the START programme for a R&D project.
	More recent support has taken the form of a Competitive Assessment Diagnostic in December 2002 followed by a reassessment in August 2003, both of which resulted in improvement recommendations being provided to the Company. In October 2005 the Company was offered Sales and Marketing support under the Food Strategy Programme. Invest NI also offered to complete a DTI benchmarking exercise for the company in November 2005 to further identify strengths and areas for improvement.
	Since the closure was announced, Invest NI has maintained regular contact with Farm Fed Chicken's Managing Director and has also liaised between the Coleraine Enterprise Office and the Company to offer employees advice on the 'Start A Business Programme'.

Police Numbers

Lynne Featherstone: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland how many police officers there are in each division of each police force in Northern Ireland; and what is the population of the area covered by each division.

Shaun Woodward: The number of police officers and the population in each District Command Unit is provided on the following table:
	
		
			 Distrcit Command Unit Total Population 2001 Census 
		
		
			 Antrim 194 48,366 
			 Newtownards 230 73,244 
			 Armagh 172 54,263 
			 Ballymena 190 58,610 
			 Bally money 80 26,894 
			 Banbridge 143 41,392 
			 Belfast East 334  
			 Belfast North 467 Total Belfast 277,391 
			 Belfast South 503  
			 Belfast West 313  
			 Carrickfergus 129 37,659 
			 Castlereagh 191 66,488 
			 Coleraine 218 56,315 
			 Cookstown 102 32,581 
			 Craigavon 242 80,671 
			 Down 214 63,828 
			 Dungannon and South Tyrone 174 47,735 
			 Fermanagh 223 57,527 
			 Foyle 310 105,066 
			 Larne 96 30,832 
			 Limavady 100 32,422 
			 Lisburn 389 108,694 
			 Magherafelt 114 39,780 
			 Moyle 47 15,933 
			 Newry and Mourne 251 87,058 
			 Newtownabbey 253 79,995 
			 North Down 218 76,323 
			 Omagh 164 47,952 
			 Strabane 159 38,248 
			 Total 6,220 1,685,267

Primary Schools

Gregory Campbell: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland pursuant to the answer of 9 March 2006, Official Report, column 1742W, on primary schools, if he will break down the number of surplus places in each constituency by education sector.

Angela Smith: Based upon 2005 enrolments, there are an estimated 33,600 surplus places in primary schools throughout the parliamentary constituencies and the breakdown is as follows.
	
		
			 Parliamentary constituency Number of surplus places Controlled primary schools Maintained primary schools Irish medium primary schools Integrated primary schools (includes controlled and grant maintained) 
		
		
			 Belfast East 2,050 1,850 200 — — 
			 Belfast North 3,500 2,000 1,475 25 — 
			 Belfast South 2,400 1,750 575 — 75 
			 Belfast West 3,450 1,150 2,000 300 — 
			 East Londonderry 1,700 875 750 — 75 
			 Foyle 2,150 450 1,700 — — 
			 Fermanagh/South Tyrone 2,100 625 1,450 — 25 
			 East Antrim 1,300 475 750 — 75 
			 Lagan Valley 1,650 1,175 400 — 75 
			 Mid-Ulster 500 200 300 — — 
			 Newry and Armagh 1,700 350 1,325 25 — 
			 North Antrim 2,200 1,375 825 — — 
			 North Down 1,550 1,375 150 — 25 
			 South Antrim 1,850 650 775 — 425 
			 South Down 1,250 175 1,025 — 50 
			 Strangford 1,050 650 400 — — 
			 Upper Bann 1,600 800 790 — 10 
			 West Tyrone 1,600 150 1,450 — — 
			 Total 33,600 16,075 16,340 350 835

Sight Loss

Sammy Wilson: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what provision is made in schools in Northern Ireland for children who have sight loss.

Angela Smith: Education and Library Boards (ELBs) assess and make provision for pupils on an individual basis, in line with the Code of Practice on the Assessment of Special Educational Needs and the supplement to it.
	All of the ELBs have staff qualified to teach children with visual impairments, including those staff attached to the peripatetic support services. In addition support is available from Jordanstown Schools' outreach service.
	Depending on the needs of the individual, ELBs make available large print literature, Braillers and appropriate ICT equipment and software. Schools themselves may also purchase specialist items through their dedicated SEN budgets.

Witness Protection

Ben Wallace: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland how much his Department spent on witness protection in (a) 2003–04, (b) 2004–05 and (c) 2005–06; and what the projected spending is for 2006–07.

Shaun Woodward: This is an operational matter for the Chief Constable of the Police Service of Northern Ireland.

Better Regulation Task Force

Phil Willis: To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster what advice members of the Better Regulation Task Force have provided to the Government; and whether the advice is published.

Jim Murphy: The Better Regulation Task Force was an independent advisory body, established in 1997 to advise the Government on regulatory issues. At the end of 2005 it was replaced by the Better Regulation Commission.
	During its existence the Better Regulation Task Force undertook over 40 studies on a wide range of regulatory issues and published its advice and recommendations in a series of reports.
	The final report produced by the Task Force "Better Regulation—from design to delivery—the 2005 report of the Better Regulation Task Force" summarises this work.
	The reports were distributed to the Libraries and are available on the Better Regulation Commission website www.brc.gov.uk, or in hard copy from the Better Regulation Commission Secretariat.
	As an Advisory Body, the Task Force also responded to Consultation Documents and contributed to the wider debate on better regulation in the United Kingdom and Europe.

Directgov Website

Oliver Heald: To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster what the running cost of the Directgov website was in 2005; and how many hits the website received in that year.

Jim Murphy: Gross direct expenditure on Directgov by the Cabinet Office in 2004–05, including operations and development was £5 million. In addition £0.4 million was contributed to shared hosting costs, making a total of £5.4 million. Figures for 2005–06 are not yet available.
	From 1 January 2005 to 31 December 2005, Directgov received 75, 572,068 page views from 17,621,999 visits.

No.10 Downing Street

Norman Baker: To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster what the expenditure by the Cabinet Office was on No. 10 Downing street in each year since 1999; and how much was spent on (a) repairs and refurbishment to the fabric of the building, (b) furnishings and (c) other expenditure in each year.

Jim Murphy: Refurbishment and maintenance at 10 Downing street is part of a continuing programme of work. The Downing street complex is maintained to standards appropriate to its Grade 1/2 listed status in consultation with English Heritage. The building also fulfils an important representational role.
	For details on the total cost of refurbishment, maintenance and structural improvements for the whole of the Downing street complex for the last three years, I refer the hon. Member to the answer given by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister to the hon. Member for Bridgewater (Mr. Liddell-Granger) on 16 March 2006, Official Report, column 2393W.
	For details on how much has been spent on maintaining, decorating and otherwise improving 10 Downing street since 1999, I refer the hon. Member to the answer given by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister to the hon. Member for Southend, West (Mr. Amess) on 21 July 2005, Official Report, column 1934W.
	Expenditure on furnishings since 1999 is shown in the table.
	
		
			  Furnishings (£) 
		
		
			 1999–2000 17,702 
			 2000–01 15,765 
			 2001–02 25,002 
			 2002–03 10,295 
			 2003–04 28,701 
			 2004–05 29,849 
		
	
	Other expenditure on 10 Downing street comprises local authority rates, utility and facilities management charges. For these purposes the Downing street complex forms an integral part of the Cabinet Office estate. Figures are therefore included in Cabinet Office costs. I refer the hon. Member to the answer which my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister gave to the hon. Member for Angus (Mr. Weir) on 12 January 2006, Official Report, column 743W, and my subsequent letter of 18 January 2006. A copy of the letter is available in the Library.

Consumer Credit

Mark Hoban: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will make a statement on the progress of his review of the regulation of (a) money service businesses, (b) trust and company service providers, (c) payment service providers and (d) firms providing consumer credit.

Ivan Lewis: The Post-Implementation Review (PIR) for the regulation of Money Service Businesses is well under way. The Government intend to publish a consultation document and an accompanying RIA in late spring, after the current pre-consultation engagement with the sector is concluded.
	The Third EC Money Laundering Directive requires that trust and company service providers be monitored for their compliance with Directive and subject to a fit and proper test for the purposes of preventing money laundering and terrorist financing. The Directive needs to be implemented into UK law by December 2007 and the Government will publish a consultation document this spring which will consider how best to meet its requirements.
	The European Commission adopted a proposal for a Directive on payment services in December 2005. This Directive will create a new regulatory regime for payment service providers across the ED, and is currently being considered by the Council of Ministers and the European Parliament. The Government will consult on its implementation in due course.
	The Consumer Credit Bill, introduced in the House of Commons on 18 May 2005, will reform the Consumer Credit Act 1974, improving the regulation of consumer credit business and enhancing consumers' rights and redress mechanisms.
	The Government's 10 point plan for reforming the regulation of financial services, which included improving consumer credit regulation through better joint working between the FSA and OFT, was published in the 2005 pre-Budget report and will be updated in due course.

Hedge Funds

Peter Kilfoyle: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether there is a requirement to register in the UK transfers of funds from the UK to overseas-based hedge funds.

Ivan Lewis: There are no general requirements in the UK to register transfers of monies for investment purposes. However, financial sector firms are required by UK law to put into place anti-money laundering controls, and the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 introduces a number of requirements to report knowledge or suspicion of money laundering to the National Criminal Intelligence Service (or the Serious Organised Crime Agency from 1 April 2006).

Meningitis

Oliver Heald: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how many children died from meningitis and associated conditions in each of the last five years.

John Healey: The information requested falls within the responsibility of the National Statistician who has been asked to reply.
	Letter from Karen Dunnell, dated 27 March 2006
	As National Statistician I have been asked to reply to your recent Parliamentary Question asking how many children died from meningitis and associated conditions in each of the last five years. (61101)
	The most recent year for which figures are available is 2004. The table below shows the number of deaths from bacterial and viral meningitis and other meningococcal diseases in children aged 0 to 15 in England and Wales for the years 2000 to 2004.
	
		Number of deaths in children under 16 (aged 0–15) from bacterial and viral meningitis and other meningococcal diseases(23), England and Wales, 2000 to 2004(24)
		
			  Number of deaths 
		
		
			 2000 295 
			 2001 266 
			 2002 204 
			 2003 242 
			 2004 193 
		
	
	(23) Figures selected using the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision (ICD-9) codes 036, 047, 320 and 322 for 2000, and the Tenth Revision (ICD-10) codes A39, A87, and G00-G03 for 2001 onwards.
	(24) Figures are for deaths occurring in each calendar year.

Mortality Rates

Andrew Lansley: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what the standardised mortality rate per 100,000 population has been for (a) cancer, (b) coronary heart disease and (c) respiratory disease in each year since 1997.

John Healey: The information requested falls within the responsibility of the National Statistician who has been asked to reply.
	Letter from Karen Dunnell dated 27 March 2006
	As National Statistician I have been asked to reply to your recent parliamentary question asking what the standardised mortality rate per 100,000 population has been for (a) cancer, (b) coronary heart disease and (c) respiratory disease in each year since 1997. (61272)
	The most recent year for which figures are available is 2004. The attached table shows the age-standardised death rate in persons of all ages by underlying cause of death in England and Wales for the years 1997 to 2004.
	
		Age-standardised death rate(25) in persons of all ages, by underlying cause of death, England and Wales, 1997 to 2004
		
			  (a) Cancer(27) (b) Coronary heart disease(28) (c) Respiratory diseases(29) 
		
		
			 1997 196.2 159.6 109.7 
			 1998 195.5 156.0 105.9 
			 1999 190.9 147.0 114.0 
			 2000 187.0 136.7 106.3 
			 2001(30) 188.0 131.4 77.2 
			 2002(30) 187.1 125.6 78.9 
			 2003(30) 183.6 120.4 84.6 
			 2004(30) 180.3 110.4 76.9 
		
	
	(25) Rate per 100,000 population standardised to the European standard population.
	(26) Data are for deaths occurring in each calendar year.
	(27) Selected using the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision (ICD-9) codes 140–208 for the years 1997 to 2000, and the Tenth Revision (ICD-10) codes COO-C97 for 2001 onwards.
	(28) Selected using the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision (ICD-9) codes 410–414 for the years 1997 to 2000, and the Tenth Revision (ICD-10) codes 120–125 for 2001 onwards.
	(29) Selected using the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision (ICD-9) codes 460–519 for the years 1997 to 2000, and the Tenth Revision (ICD-10) codes JOO-J99 for 2001 onwards.
	(30) The introduction of ICD-10 for coding cause of death in 2001 means that figures are not completely comparable with data for years before this date. The data should therefore be interpreted with caution. The effect of the change in classification in 2001 on mortality is described in an article published in 'Health Statistics Quarterly Summer 2002' on 23 May 2002. More information about these changes, as well, as the results of the study, can be found on the NS website at www.statistics.gov.uk/icd10mortality.

Pensions

Philip Hammond: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer pursuant to the answer to the hon. Member for Braintree of 11 November 2005, Official Report, column 775W, on pensions, what the accrued liability as at 31 March 2005 would have been using a discount rate equal to the (a) yield on long-dated AA rated corporate bonds and (b) yield on long-dated index-linked Government stock on that date.

Des Browne: I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave to the hon. Member for Fareham (Mr. Hoban) 9 March 2006, Official Report, column 1645W.

Suicides (Farmers)

Roger Williams: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how many farmers have committed suicide in England and Wales in each year since 2000.

John Healey: The information requested falls within the responsibility of the National Statistician who has been asked to reply.
	Letter from Karen Dunnell, dated 27 March 2006
	As National Statistician I have been asked to reply to your recent Parliamentary Question asking how many farmers have committed suicide in England and Wales in each year since 2000. (60998)
	I refer you to the answer given by the Financial Secretary to the Treasury on the 10 November 2005, Official Report, column 645W.

Tax Credits

Greg Clark: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether the Government collects information on the number of hours worked by recipients of tax credits.

Ivan Lewis: Information on the number of hours worked by in-work families with tax credit awards as at December 2005 is available in "Child and Working Tax Credits Statistics: December 2005". This publication can be found at: http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/stats/personal-tax-credits/dec05_quarterly_dec05.xls

Tax Credits

Greg Clark: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what the take-up rate of each category of tax credit was in each year since 1997.

Ivan Lewis: Information on take-up of child tax credit and working tax credit in 2003–04 is available in "child tax credit and working tax credit: Take-up rates—2003–04". This publication can be found at: http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/stats/personal-tax-credits/takeup_rates_2003–04_mar06.pdf
	Information on take-up of working families tax credit (the predecessor to child tax credit and working tax credit) for 2000–01 to 2002–03 is available in the "working families tax credit take-up rates" publications. These publications can be found at: http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/stats/wftc/takeup rates.htm

Value Added Tax

Simon Hughes: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will make a statement on the arrangements proposed to exempt from value added tax new buildings for (a) city academies with community use and (b) other youth and education facilities with community use.

Ivan Lewis: VAT is not chargeable on the construction of academies, or parts of academy buildings, provided that use of the building for which a charge is made will account for less than 10 per cent. of its total use under this relief, taking the year as a whole (including non-term time) a 1,000 student institution could potentially provide charged extended services for an average of around 50 people per day.
	VAT agreements with our European partners mean that while we can maintain this relief for the construction of charitable buildings, it cannot be extended further. DfES and HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) will explore with academies how community use of their facilities might be maximised, consistent with this VAT relief.
	If VAT is chargeable on construction of any part of an academy building, this can be reclaimed from HMRC to the extent that the building is to be used for a taxable business purpose. DfES and HMRC will also explore with academies how any remaining VAT costs might be managed within the current rules—for example by allowing academies to spread VAT costs relating to non-business use of their facilities over a 20-year period.
	In relation to other youth and education facilities, the VAT relief detailed applies for buildings constructed for charities. Where VAT is chargeable on construction, this can be reclaimed from HMRC to the extent that it relates to taxable business use of the facilities. In addition, local authorities can usually reclaim from HMRC all VAT costs relating to schools and other youth and community facilities that they maintain.
	Where VAT is chargeable and not reclaimable from HMRC, it is legitimate for bids for grants or public funding to include relevant overhead costs, such as this irrecoverable VAT.

Asbestos Regulations

Frank Field: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what enforcement measures are in place to ensure that existing regulations on the use of asbestos are adhered to.

Anne McGuire: The Asbestos (Prohibitions) Regulations 1992 prohibit the importation, supply and use (namely the manufacture) of asbestos and asbestos containing products into the United Kingdom. The Health & Safety Executive (HSE) are the enforcing authority for these regulations and to their knowledge there is no manufacture of asbestos containing products within the UK. HSE have the authority to grant exceptions to the prohibition of supply and importation. Such an exemption is granted only in exceptional circumstances with strict conditions applied by HSE.
	However, asbestos containing materials were widely used up to the implementation of these regulations. Although it is difficult to give a precise figure, it was estimated in 2000, that 500,000 commercial premises contain asbestos products. Asbestos products present no risk to a person unless its condition deteriorates and asbestos fibres are released. Therefore the principal duty on the person in control of these premises is Control of Asbestos at Work Regulations 2002 regulation 4, commonly known as the Duty to Manage. HSE Inspectors and Local Authority Environmental Health Officers enforce this legislation. The Duty to Manage is one of the strands of HSE's Disease Reduction Programme, which sets out a schedule of work to seek compliance with this legislation. There is a range of enforcement powers available to secure compliance, including the issue of enforcement notices and taking legal proceedings.
	When work has to be carried out on the asbestos material, including its removal then it is subject to the Control of Asbestos at Work Regulations. This requires that prior to the commencement of work that a suitable risk assessment is carried out to determine the appropriate control measures required to prevent, or reduce to the lowest level practicable, exposure to asbestos fibres. HSE Inspectors and Local Authority Environmental Health Officers have the same enforcement powers as for the Duty to Manage Asbestos.
	For high-risk activities, then that work is also subject to Asbestos (Licensing) Regulations 1983. These prohibit an employer or self-employed person from carrying out any significant work with asbestos insulation, asbestos coatings and asbestos insulating board unless HSE's Asbestos Licensing Unit has granted them a licence. The applicant is subject to a rigorous assessment prior to any licence being granted. HSE have the authority to apply any conditions on a licence, refuse, amend, or revoke a licence. A licence is granted for a fixed period and the applicant is subject to a further assessment on re-application. A condition on all licences is that work with asbestos is notified to the relevant enforcing authority. HSE carry out site visits for a sample of this notified work, and if acceptable standards are not met take suitable enforcement action, which includes letters, enforcement notices and prosecutions. In addition relevant information is fed-back to the Asbestos Licensing Unit, to enable the terms and conditions of an individual licence to be continually reviewed.

Benefits

Madeleine Moon: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many applications for (a) mobility allowance, (b) disability living allowance and (c) attendance allowance were allowed in each year between 2000 and 2005 (i) on application and (ii) on appeal, broken down by region; and if he will make a statement.

Anne McGuire: The requested information for mobility allowance is not available because the benefit was replaced by the higher rate mobility component of disability living allowance in April 1992. The available information for disability living allowance and attendance allowance is in the tables.
	
		Disability living allowance: number(31) of new awards(32) (a) on initial claims; and (b) on appeal in each Government office region(33) in Great Britain and in total in each year from 2000–01 to 2004–05
		
			 Government office region North East North West Yorkshire and Humber East Midlands West Midlands East 
		
		
			 Awards on initial claims 
			 2000–01 10.5 29.8 21.0 14.8 20.9 16.6 
			 2001–02 9.9 33.1 20.7 14.2 20.5 18.2 
			 2002–03 9.5 33.6 23.5 17.1 21.7 19.3 
			 2003–04 8.5 31.5 20.3 15.5 20.0 17.6 
			 2004–05 7.5 29.3 17.1 14.1 18.1 16.1 
			 Awards on appeal   
			 2000–01 2.1 5.6 2.2 1.4 1.4 1.2 
			 2001–02 3.1 4.6 2.3 2.2 2.0 1.2 
			 2002–03 1.9 4.4 2.4 1.4 2.2 1.2 
			 2003–04 2.2 3.8 2.1 2.0 2.3 1.0 
			 2004–05 2.6 4.5 2.1 1.6 2.0 1.0 
		
	
	
		
			 Government office region London South East South West Wales Scotland Total 
		
		
			 Awards on initial claims 
			 2000–01 24.5 19.9 14.4 14.0 21.4 207.9 
			 2001–02 25.4 20.6 14.7 15.3 21.4 214.1 
			 2002–03 28.9 22.2 16.3 16.5 23.4 232.0 
			 2003–04 26.1 23.8 16.2 15.5 22.1 217.2 
			 2004–05 23.5 22.2 17.6 13.8 22.1 201.5 
			
			 Awards on appeal   
			 2000–01 2.8 1.6 1.6 2.0 4.8 26.8 
			 2001–02 3.7 2.2 2.0 2.1 6.1 31.5 
			 2002–03 3.3 2.2 2.1 1.8 5.6 28.6 
			 2003–04 3.0 1.9 1.7 1.5 5.2 26.7 
			 2004–05 3.5 2.2 1.6 1.7 5.5 28.2 
		
	
	(31) Figures are based on the 5 per cent. QSE data (and are therefore subject to sampling variation) and are expressed in thousands, rounded to the nearest hundred. Totals may not sum due to rounding.
	(32) Awards may be for a care component only, or for a mobility component only, or for a care component and a mobility component.
	(33) Awards have been allocated to Government office regions using the ONS postcode directory.
	Source:
	DWP Information Directorate: Work and Pensions Longitudinal Study for totals and 5 per cent. samples for detail/long time series.
	
		Attendance allowance: number(34) of new awards (a) on initial claims; and (b) on appeal in each Government office region(35) in Great Britain and in total in each year from 2000–01 to 2004–05
		
			 Government office region North East North West Yorkshire and Humber East Midlands West Midlands East 
		
		
			 Awards on initial claims   
			 2000–01 14.9 38.6 28.4 24.7 31.1 30.1 
			 2001–02 14.0 36.2 24.4 21.8 27.9 29.0 
			 2002–03 14.2 37.4 25.5 20.9 28.6 29.6 
			 2003–04 14.1 40.5 23.9 22.9 30.7 30.2 
			 2004–05 14.9 39.8 23.7 22.6 29.5 29.8 
			
			 Awards on appeal   
			 2000–01 *0.4 0.7 *0.4 *0.3 *0.4 *0.3 
			 2001–02 0.5 *0.4 *0.4 *0.4 *0.4 *0.3 
			 2002–03 *0.3 0.6 0.6 0.5 0.7 *0.3 
			 2003–04 *0.4 0.6 0.6 *0.4 *0.4 *0.2 
			 2004–05 *0.4 *0.2 0.5 *0.4 *0.4 *0.3 
		
	
	
		
			 Government office region London South East South West Wales Scotland Total 
		
		
			 Awards on initial claims   
			 2000–01 26.2 36.9 32.8 17.4 28.5 309.6 
			 2001–02 27.0 37.8 28.4 18.0 25.9 290.4 
			 2002–03 28.0 40.4 32.3 17.8 29.8 304.5 
			 2003–04 30.2 44.5 35.1 19.1 31.3 322.6 
			 2004–05 25.9 42.0 33.3 19.8 29.4 310.7 
			
			 Awards on appeal   
			 2000–01 0.5 0.6 *0.3 *0.3 1.1 5.2 
			 2001–02 0.6 0.7 *0.3 *0.3 1.4 5.7 
			 2002–03 0.5 0.7 *0.3 *0.3 0.9 5.8 
			 2003–04 *0.4 0.5 *0.2 *0.2 0.7 4.7 
			 2004–05 0.7 0.5 *0.3 *0.2 0.7 4.5 
		
	
	(34) Figures are based on the 5 per cent. QSE data (and are therefore subject to sampling variation—those below 500 are subject to a high degree of sampling error and are marked "*") and are expressed in thousands, rounded to the nearest hundred. Totals may not sum due to rounding.
	(35) Awards have been allocated to Government office regions using the ONS postcode directory
	Source:
	DWP Information Directorate

Benefits

Cheryl Gillan: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions 
	(1)  what targets his Department has set to ensure that claims for (a) jobseeker's allowance, (b) income support and (c) incapacity benefit are paid at the earliest possible date after the initial claim has been made;
	(2)  what steps he is taking to ensure benefits are paid to claimants in the Chesham and Amersham constituency as quickly as possible after a claim is made.

Margaret Hodge: holding answers 6 February 2006
	The administration of Jobcentre Plus is a matter for the chief executive of Jobcentre Plus, Lesley Strathie. She will write to the hon. Member.
	Letter from Lesley Strathie
	The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions has asked me to reply to your questions asking what targets his Department has set to ensure that claims for (a) Jobseeker's Allowance, (b) Income Support and (c) Incapacity Benefit are paid at the earliest possible date after the initial claim has been made, and what steps he is taking to ensure benefits are paid to claimants in the Chesham and Amersham constituency as quickly as possible after a claim is made. This is something which falls within the responsibilities delegated to me as Chief Executive of Jobcentre Plus.
	Jobcentre Plus does not have targets for benefit processing times. However, data relating to claim clearance times is collected and measured against "acceptable standards of delivery" that are set at the beginning of each year. By this we mean how many working days it takes, on average, to process benefit claims. This is referred to as the Actual Average Clearance Time (AACT) and each benefit is set its own AACT benchmark.
	The information requested is in the table.
	
		
			  Acceptable standards of delivery (days) 
		
		
			 Jobseeker's Allowance 12 
			 Income Support 12 
			 Incapacity Benefit 19 
		
	
	A range of actions are underway to improve benefit clearance times in the Chesham and Amersham constituency. These include:
	moving work around the Benefit Delivery Centre network;
	drafting in additional staff and telephone teams;
	establishing dedicated arrears clearance teams; and
	deploying experienced officers on more complex claims to reduce delays.
	These actions are designed to deal with outstanding claims by the beginning of April. New claims for Jobseeker's Allowance, Incapacity Benefit and Income Support are already being delivered within acceptable average clearance times.

Benefits

Danny Alexander: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions if he will estimate the annual cost of uprating housing benefit and council tax benefit earnings disregards for (a) a single person to £8.35, (b) a couple to £16.75, (c) higher rate recipients to £25.10 and (d) lone parents to £38.

James Plaskitt: The estimated additional benefit expenditure that would arise from such an uprating is in the following table.
	
		Annual cost of uprating housing benefit and council tax benefit earnings disregards £ million
		
			  Housing benefit Council tax benefit 
		
		
			 Single person to £8.35 9 2 
			 Couple to £16.75 16 8 
			 Higher rate recipients to £25.10 4 2 
			 Lone parents to £38 38 7 
			 Total 67 19 
		
	
	Notes:
	1. The costs are rounded to the nearest £1 million and are for Great Britain.
	2. The impact is estimated using the Department's Policy Simulation Model for 2005–06, using data from the 2003–04 Family Resources Survey up-rated to 2005–06 prices, benefit rates and earnings levels, and is calibrated to latest published forecasts and policies.
	3. Results are subject to sampling and reporting errors and estimation assumptions, and are therefore indicative only. No behavioural changes are assumed.

Benefits

Danny Alexander: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions pursuant to the answer of 1 February 2006, Official Report, column 590W, on benefits, what the principal reasons were for the decision not to implement the simplification of the non-dependent deduction regime proposed in the Housing Green Paper, Quality and Choice: A decent Home for All, in 2000; and if he will make a statement.

James Plaskitt: The Government's reasons for not taking forward options to simplify non-dependent deductions were set out in paragraph 10.54 of "The Way Forward for Housing" published in December 2000:
	"There are a number of changes raised in the Green Paper which we don't intend to pursue at this time. These include further reform of disregards, tapers and non- dependent deductions. Given the current problems, sorting out the administration, combined with our "benefit run-ons", will have more impact on work incentives than changing additional rules in these areas".
	Although we have not taken forward the options in the Green Paper, there have been reforms to the non-dependent deduction scheme. From October 2003, if the householder or their partner is aged 65 or more, and a non-dependant moves into their home or an existing non-dependant's circumstances change to increase the deduction, then the start of the deduction or increase in deduction is delayed for 26 weeks. Also, from April 2005, if the non-dependant is on pension credit, no deduction is made in respect of that non-dependant.
	However, as with all aspects of the benefit system, the provisions for non-dependants in housing benefit will continue to remain under review.

Benefits

Andrew Gwynne: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many people in (a) Denton and Reddish constituency, (b) Tameside metropolitan borough and (c) Stockport metropolitan borough are in receipt of (i) disability benefit and (ii) income support.

James Plaskitt: The most recent available information is in the table.
	
		Income support and disability living allowance claimants:August 2005
		
			  Income support Disability living allowance 
		
		
			 Denton and Reddish constituency 3,600 5,300 
			 Tameside MBC 9,500 13,000 
			 Stockport MBC 8,100 12,200 
		
	
	Notes:
	1. Figures have been rounded to the nearest hundred .
	2. Pension credit replaced minimum income guarantee (MIG) on 6 October 2003. Residual MIG cases have been excluded from the income support figures. These are mainly cases where the claimant is aged under 60 and the partner over 60.
	3. Disability living allowance figures show the number of people in receipt of an allowance, and excludes people with entitlement where the payment has been suspended, for example where they are in hospital.
	Source:
	DWP Work and Pensions Longitudinal Study.

Benefits

Philip Hollobone: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what steps his Department is taking to ensure deaf adults claim the benefits to which they are entitled.

Anne McGuire: The Disability and Carer Service (DCS) have a number of initiatives in place to help people who are deaf or hard of hearing. These include the Customer Information Leaflet (CIL) which is produced in British Sign Language (BSL) in both video and DVD format. All DCS offices have Text-phones with text-phone numbers that are published to the public. Typetalk is also available (a BT service that enables a customer who is deaf, hard of hearing or speech impaired to communicate via a third party on the telephone).
	For face-to-face contact with customers accessing our services, some DCS staff have BSL interpreting qualifications and DCS staff can also book external BSL interpreters via RNID or contact the Council for the Advancement of Communication with Deaf People (CACDP). In addition, DCS are currently producing an information video and DVD, "You Can Benefit", which includes subtitles, audio and a BSL interpreter.
	Pension Centres and Jobcentre Plus offices are equipped with audio induction loops, high-powered earphones, radio microphones and text-phones. Training and guidance on deaf and hard of hearing issues are routinely provided for staff. The Pension Service Local Service teams use a portable communication aid to support those people who are hard of hearing.
	The Pension Service are working with the Royal National Institute for Deaf People (RNID) to ensure that the service achieves the RNID Louder than Words accreditation, which has already been attained by the National Pension Centre.

Benefits

Andrew Smith: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many pensioners in Oxford East constituency receive council tax benefit; and how many have received it in each of the last 10 years.

James Plaskitt: The information is not available in the format requested. Council tax benefit information is not available broken down by parliamentary constituency. A breakdown of the figures by age is not available prior to 2003. The available information for Oxford city council is in the table.
	
		Council tax benefit recipients aged 60 years or over in the Oxford city council area
		
			  Number 
		
		
			 August  
			 2003 4,000 
			 2004 3,600 
			 2005 3,700 
		
	
	Notes:
	1. The data refers to benefit units, which may be a single person or a couple where either the claimant or partner is aged 60 years or over.
	2. Figures have been rounded to the nearest hundred.
	3. Figures exclude any single adult rebate cases.
	Source:
	Housing Benefit and Council Tax Benefit Management Information System Quarterly 100 per cent. caseload stock-count taken between August 2003 and August 2005.

Benefits

Andrew Gwynne: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many residents in (a) Denton and Reddish constituency, (b) Tameside metropolitan borough and (c) Stockport metropolitan borough are (i) entitled to and (ii) receiving council tax benefit.

James Plaskitt: Information on council tax benefit is not available broken down by parliamentary constituency.
	The latest available information on unclaimed council tax benefit is in "Income Related Benefits Estimates of Take Up in 2003–04", a copy of which is in the Library.
	As at August 2005, the most recent available figures, there were 20,700 households in the Stockport metropolitan borough council area and 22,000 households in the Tameside metropolitan borough council area in receipt of council tax benefit.

Benefits

Danny Alexander: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions pursuant to the answer of 27 February 2006, Official Report, column 246W, on housing benefit, what research evidence base his Department is using to determine policy decisions on the non-dependent deduction regime for housing benefit.

James Plaskitt: The current system of non-dependant deductions has been in place since 1992, with an increase in the number of non-dependant deduction bands from four to six in 1996. The latest research specifically about non-dependant deductions is: "Paying for Rented Housing: Non-Dependant Deductions from Housing Benefit". A copy is available in the Library. The Department has implemented several recommendations made in this report, including improvements to the notification processes and concessions to those aged 65 and over.
	Note:
	Department of Social Security Research Report no. 43, published in 1996.

Benefits

Greg Clark: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what the take-up rate of each category of means-tested benefit was in each year since 1997.

James Plaskitt: I refer the hon. Member to the written answer I gave the right hon. Member for North Tyneside (Mr. Byers), on 3 March 2006, Official Report, column 1034W.

Carer's Allowance

Madeleine Moon: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many people in Bridgend constituency have ceased to receive carer's allowance having reached pensionable age in each of the last five years.

Anne McGuire: The administration of carer's allowance is a matter for the chief executive of the Disability and Carers Service, Mr. Terry Moran. He will write to the hon. Member with the information requested.
	Letter from Terry Moran
	You asked the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, how many people in Bridgend constituency have ceased to receive carers' allowance having reached pensionable age in each of the last five years.
	The Minister for Disabled People, Anne McGuire MP, promised you a substantive reply from the Chief Executive of the Disability and Carers Service.
	The information requested is not available. Such information as is available is in the following table:
	
		State pension claimants in Bridgend parliamentary constituency with underlying entitlement to carer's allowance but not in receipt of carer's allowance Thousand
		
			  Number 
		
		
			 August  
			 2005 0.1 
			 2004 0.1 
			 2003 0.1 
			   
			 September  
			 2002 0.1 
			 2001 — 
		
	
	Notes:
	1. Definitions and conventions: "—" nil or negligible, "." not applicable; caseload figures are rounded to the nearest 100 and displayed in thousands.
	2. Totals show the number of people not in receipt of an allowance and where they are recorded as being in receipt of state pension on the carer's allowance computer system.
	3. Parliamentary constituency of claimant (Westminster): These constituencies are used for the Westminster parliament. For the May 2005 general election, the constituencies in Scotland changed. These constituencies are included in the tables from May 2005 onwards. Prior to that, these new constituencies are shown as missing.
	Source:
	DWP Information Directorate: Work and Pensions Longitudinal Study.
	I hope this is helpful.

Carer's Allowance

Julie Morgan: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many carers aged 60 and over in each Welsh parliamentary constituency receive the non-standard rate of carer's allowance, broken down by sex.

Anne McGuire: The administration of carer's allowance is a matter for the chief executive of the Disability and Carers Service, Mr. Terry Moran. He will write to the hon. Member with the information requested.
	Letter from Terry Moran
	You asked the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, how many carers aged 60 and over in each Welsh parliamentary constituency receive the non-standard rate of carer's allowance broken down by sex.
	The Minister for Disabled People, Anne McGuire MP, promised you a substantive reply from the Chief Executive of the Disability and Carers Service.
	The information requested is not available. Such information as is available is in the following table:
	
		Carer's allowance cases in payment by parliamentary constituency as at August 2005 for people aged 60 and over Thousand
		
			  Number 
		
		
			 Wales 3.0 
			   
			 Aberavon 0.1 
			 Alyn and Deeside 0.1 
			 Blaenau Gwent 0.1 
			 Brecon and Radnorshire 0.1 
			 Bridgend 0.1 
			 Caernarfon — 
			 Caerphilly 0.1 
			 Cardiff Central — 
			 Cardiff North — 
			 Cardiff South and Penarth 0.1 
			 Cardiff West 0.1 
			 Carmarthen East and Dinefwr 0.1 
			 Carmarthen West and South Pembrokeshire 0.1 
			 Ceredigion 0.1 
			 Clwyd South 0.1 
			 Clwyd West 0.1 
			 Conwy — 
			 Cynon Valley 0.1 
			 Delyn — 
			 Gower 0.1 
			 Islwyn 0.1 
			 Llanelli 0.1 
			 Meirionnydd Nant Conwy — 
			 Merthyr Tydfil and Rhymney 0.1 
			 Monmouth 0.1 
			 Montgomeryshire — 
			 Neath 0.1 
			 Newport East 0.1 
			 Newport West 0.1 
			 Ogmore 0.1 
			 Pontypridd 0.1 
			 Preseli Pembrokeshire 0.1 
			 Rhondda 0.1 
			 Swansea East 0.1 
			 Swansea West 0.1 
			 Torfaen 0.1 
			 Vale of Clwyd 0.1 
			 Vale of Glamorgan 0.1 
			 Wrexham 0.1 
			 Ynys Mon 0.1 
		
	
	Notes:
	1. Definitions and conventions: "—" nil or negligible; "." not applicable; caseload figures are rounded to the nearest hundred and displayed in thousands; Totals may not sum due to rounding.
	2. Caseload (thousands) totals show the number of people in receipt of an allowance, and excludes people with entitlement where the payment has been suspended.
	3. Parliamentary constituency of claimant (Westminster) These constituencies are used for the Westminster parliament. For the May 2005 general election, the constituencies in Scotland changed. These constituencies are included in the tables from May 2005 onwards. Prior to that, these new constituencies are shown as missing.
	Source:
	DWP Information Directorate: Work and Pensions Longitudinal Study.
	I hope this is helpful.

Child Maintenance

Philip Dunne: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions whether consent orders by courts may be (a) taken into account and (b) over-ridden by the Child Support Agency in assessing non-resident parents for maintenance in a case where a non-resident parent has agreed to pay sums in lieu of maintenance.

James Plaskitt: There are only limited circumstances in which sums paid to an ex-partner in lieu of ongoing maintenance can be taken into account.
	Under the new child support scheme non-resident parents and parents with care may apply for a "variation" to the maintenance calculation. A non-resident parent can apply to have their maintenance reduced to reflect a transfer of property or capital to the parent with care.
	This applies where the transfer was valued at £5,000 or more and was made as a result of a court order or written maintenance agreement made prior to 5 April 1993, and the transfer was made in lieu of ongoing child maintenance. These were often referred to as "clean break" settlements. In all other cases transfers of property or capital cannot be reflected in maintenance liabilities.
	A variation is only allowed where it is "just and equitable" to do so. Broadly this means that the result of the variation must be fair, taking account of all the circumstances of the case, and, in particular, the welfare of any child likely to be affected. This includes the child for whom maintenance is paid as well as any other children living with either parent.
	An order for periodical payments of maintenance made, by consent or otherwise, before 3 March 2003 will usually prevent an application for child support maintenance unless the parent with care has claimed a prescribed benefit. Such an order made after that date will prevent an application for a year, again unless the parent with care claims benefit. When a maintenance calculation is made in a case where an order exists, that part of the order which provides for periodical payment of maintenance ceases to have effect.

Child Poverty

John Cummings: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what estimate he has made of the level of child poverty in Easington constituency in the last five years.

Margaret Hodge: Specific information regarding low income for Wales, Scotland and the English regions of Great Britain is available in the latest publication of "Households Below Average Income 1994–95 to 2004–05". The threshold of below 60 per cent. contemporary median income is the most commonly used in reporting trends in low income.
	The data source does not allow us to provide robust estimates below regional level and, therefore, estimates for the number of children living in poverty in Easington for the past five years are not available.

Child Poverty

Stephen Crabb: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many children were living in poverty in (a) Wales and (b) Pembrokeshire in each year since 1997.

Margaret Hodge: holding answer 14 March 2006
	Specific information regarding low income for Wales and other regions of Great Britain is available in the latest publication of the 'Households Below Average Income 1994–95 to 2004–05'. The threshold of below 60 per cent. contemporary median income is the most commonly used in reporting trends in low income.
	The specific information requested is not available; however I have provided three-year averages showing the numbers of children in relative low income households in Wales on both before and after housing costs bases in the following table. The data source does not allow us to provide robust estimates below regional level therefore estimates for the numbers of children living in poverty in Pembrokeshire are not available.
	
		Numbers of children (in millions) living in households with relative income less than 60 per cent. of median income since 1997: Wales
		
			 Three-year moving averages Before housing costs After housing costs 
		
		
			 1996–97 to 1998–99 0.18 0.23 
			 1997–98 to 1999–2000 0.18 0.23 
			 1998–99 to 2000–01 0.18 0.23 
			 1999–2000 to 2001–02 0.17 0.21 
			 2000–01 to 2002–03 0.16 0.20 
			 2001–02 to 2003–04 0.15 0.19 
			 2002–03 to 2004–05 0.15 0.18 
		
	
	Source:
	Family Resources Survey

Child Support Agency

Keith Vaz: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions 
	(1)  what the nature is of technical problems affecting the Child Support Agency's new computer system; and if he will make a statement;
	(2)  when the technical problems which are affecting the Child Support Agency's new computer system began;
	(3)  how many payments to single parents have been delayed due to the technical problems affecting the Child Support Agency's new computer system; and if he will make a statement.

James Plaskitt: The administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for the Chief Executive, Mr. Stephen Geraghty. He will write to the right hon. Friend with the information requested.
	Letter from Stephen Geraghty
	In reply to your recent Parliamentary Question about the Child Support Agency, the Secretary of State promised a substantive reply from the Chief Executive. The Chief Executive is currently unavailable as he is communicating the Operational Improvement Plan to all Agency staff. I am responding on his behalf.
	You asked the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what the nature is of technical problems affecting the Child Support Agency's new computer system; and if he will make a statement.
	In addition, you asked how long the technical problems which are affecting the Child Support Agency's new computer system have been continuing.
	And finally, you asked how many payments to single parents have been delayed due to the technical problems affecting the Child Support Agency's new computer system; and if he will make a statement.
	The following response seeks to address all three questions.
	The new child support scheme was introduced on 3 March 2003. It has been well publicised that there has been a number of technical problems with the performance of the new computer system (CS2) from this date. A great deal of work has been carried out to improve the stability of the new computer system (CS2) and operational performance has improved to the point where contracted service levels are now consistently being met.
	There are still a number of defects in the CS2 computer system which can prevent some cases from progressing. The clerical process allows staff to progress these cases off-line to ensure that any money paid in by the non-resident parent is paid out to the parent with care.
	Where a payment has not been issued by the system a manual payment can be requested. The Agency has a process for manual payments which has reduced delays in issuing such payments to clients. In such circumstances, a hold is placed on the computer system to prevent it from releasing the funds pending recovery and adjustment of the accounts. Further investigation is taking place to ensure that this system is effective.
	We have around 3,400 customers who are regularly paid their maintenance manually. This includes a mix of payment frequencies—i.e. weekly, monthly, 2- monthly, 6-monthly etc. I am unable to give a breakdown between computer failure and other reasons for payments having to be made manually.
	Work is ongoing to remedy the problems with the new computer system, and future IT releases are planned during 2006 and 2007 to resolve the various system performance issues and build on the improvements already made.
	I hope you find this helpful

Energy Sector (Industrial Injuries)

Stephen Crabb: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many industrial (a) injuries and (b) fatalities have occurred in UK (i) coal mines and (ii) oil and gas extraction, refining and storage facilities has been since 1990.

Anne McGuire: HSE systems record the number of workplace injuries reported in Great Britain under the Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences Regulations 1995 (RIDDOR 95). These systems do not identify the data to the level of detail requested; the closest available detail is provided. Access to older data at the required level of detail is not readily available and would require the restoration of archived databases.
	Across the nine-year period 1996–97 to the provisional year 2004–05:
	10,823 industrial injuries in Great Britain were reported to HSE that occurred in the defined industries as follows: For the years 1996–97 to 1999–2000: Coal mines, SIC92 Division 10 'Mining of coal and lignite, extraction of peat'; Oil and gas extraction, SIC92 Division 11 Extraction of crude petroleum and natural gas'; for years 2000–01 and on: Coal mines, SIC 92 codes 10100 'Mining and agglomeration of hard coal', 10101 'Deep coal mines', 10102 'Opencast coal working'; Oil and gas extraction,11100 'Extraction of crude petroleum and natural gas', 11200 'Service activities incidental to oil and gas extraction excluding surveying'; Refining, 23200 'Manufacture of refined petroleum products', 23201 'Mineral oil refining', 23209 'Other treatment of petroleum products (excluding petrochemicals manufacture'; Oil and gas storage, 51510 'Wholesale of solid, liquid and gaseous fuels and related products', 51511 'Wholesale of petroleum and petroleum products', 51519 'Wholesale of other fuels and related products'.
	Of these industrial injuries, 48 fatal injuries were reported. Table 1 provides a yearly breakdown. Table 2 shows a yearly breakdown by fatal, major and over- 3-day injury categories reportable under RIDDOR 95.
	
		Table 1: Industrial (a) injuries and (b) fatalities in the industries as defined above reported to HSE in Great Britain in each year since 1996–97
		
			   Industrial, of which: 
			  Year(36)/Industry  Employment status (a) injuries (b) fatalities 
		
		
			 1996–97
			 (i) Coal mines Workers 714 4 
			  Members of public — — 
			  Total 714 4 
			 (ii) Oil and gas extraction Workers 381 2 
			  Members of public 1 — 
			  Total 382 2 
			 
			 1997–98
			 (i) Coal mines Workers 1,245 7 
			  Members of public — — 
			  Total 1,245 7 
			 (ii) Oil and gas extraction Workers 421 3 
			  Members of public 1 — 
			  Total 422 3 
			 
			 1998–99
			 (i) Coal mines Workers 1,101 4 
			  Members of public 2 — 
			  Total 1,103 4 
			 (ii) Oil and gas extraction Workers 355 1 
			  Members of public — — 
			  Total 355 1 
			 
			 1999–2000
			 (i) Coal mines Workers 942 1 
			  Members of public 3 — 
			  Total 945 1 
			 (ii) Oil and gas extraction Workers 279 2 
			  Members of public 1 — 
			  Total 280 2 
			 
			 2000–01
			 (i) Coal mines Workers 918 — 
			  Members of public 2 — 
			  Total 920 — 
			 (ii) Oil and gas extraction Workers 275 3 
			  Members of public 4 2 
			  Total 279 5 
			 Refining Workers 105 — 
			  Members of public — — 
			  Total 105 — 
			 Oil and gas storage Workers 112 1 
			  Members of public 2 — 
			  Total 114 1 
			 
			 2001–02
			 (i) Coal mines Workers 871 2 
			  Members of public — — 
			  Total 871 2 
			 (ii) Oil and gas extraction Workers 277 5 
			  Members of public 2 1 
			  Total 279 6 
			 Refining Workers 47 1 
			  Members of public — — 
			  Total 47 1 
			 Oil and gas storage Workers 102 — 
			  Members of public 2 — 
			  Total 104 — 
			 
			 2002–03
			 (i) Coal mines Workers 667 — 
			  Members of public 3 1 
			  Total 670 1 
			 (ii) Oil and gas extraction Workers 230 — 
			  Members of public 1 — 
			  Total 231 — 
			 Refining Workers 37 1 
			  Members of public — — 
			  Total 37 1 
			 Oil and gas storage Workers 79 1 
			  Members of public — — 
			  Total 79 1 
			 
			 2003–04
			 (i) Coal mines Workers 557 2 
			  Members of public 1 — 
			  Total 558 2 
			 (ii) Oil and gas extraction Workers 206 3 
			  Members of public 1 — 
			  Total 207 3 
			 Refining Workers 50 — 
			  Members of public — — 
			  Total 50 — 
			 Oil and gas storage Workers 91 1 
			  Members of public — — 
			  Total 91 1 
			 
			 2004–052
			 (i) Coal mines Workers 416 — 
			  Members of public 1 — 
			  Total 417 — 
			 (ii) Oil and gas extraction Workers 204 — 
			  Members of public — — 
			  Total 204 — 
			 Refining Workers 29 — 
			  Members of public 1 — 
			  Total 30 — 
			 Oil and gas storage Workers 83 — 
			  Members of public 1 — 
			  Total 84 — 
			 Total  10,823 48 
		
	
	(36) Prior to 2000–01 the activities of refining and oil and gas storage could not be separately identified from other activities also included in the top-level industry coding in use at this time.
	(37) Provisional.
	
		Table 2: Injuries to workers and members of the public reported to HSE in the industries as defined above, 1996–97 to 2004–05(39)
		
			 Year(38)/Employment status Fatal injuries Non-fatal major injuries Over-3-day injuries All reported injuries 
		
		
			 1996–97 
			 Workers 4 200 510 714 
			 Members of public — — n/a — 
			 Total 4 200 510 714 
			 Workers 2 28 351 381 
			 Members of public — 1 n/a 1 
			 Total 2 29 351 382 
			  
			 1997–98 
			 Workers 7 213 1,025 1,245 
			 Members of public — — n/a — 
			 Total 7 213 1,025 1,245 
			 Workers 3 84 334 421 
			 Members of public — 1 n/a 1 
			 Total 3 85 334 422 
			  
			 1998–99 
			 Workers 4 134 963 1,101 
			 Members of public — 2 n/a 2 
			 Total 4 136 963 1,103 
			 Workers 1 79 275 355 
			 Members of public — — n/a — 
			 Total 1 79 275 355 
			  
			 1999–2000 
			 Workers 1 128 813 942 
			 Members of public — 3 n/a 3 
			 Total 1 131 813 945 
			 Workers 2 61 216 279 
			 Members of public — 1 n/a 1 
			 Total 2 62 216 280 
			  
			 2000–01 
			 Workers — 106 812 918 
			 Members of public — 2 n/a 2 
			 Total — 106 812 920 
			 Workers 3 65 207 275 
			 Members of public 2 2 n/a 4 
			 Total 5 65 207 279 
			 Workers — 34 71 105 
			 Members of public — — n/a — 
			 Total — 34 71 105 
			 Workers 1 29 82 112 
			 Members of public — 2 n/a 2 
			 Total 1 29 82 114 
			  
			 2001–02 
			 Workers 2 106 763 871 
			 Members of public — — n/a — 
			 Total 2 106 763 871 
			 Workers 5 66 206 277 
			 Members of public 1 1 n/a 2 
			 Total 6 66 206 279 
			 Workers 1 8 38 47 
			 Members of public — — n/a — 
			 Total 1 8 38 47 
			 Workers — 27 75 102 
			 Members of public — 2 n/a 2 
			 Total — 27 75 104 
			  
			 2002–03 
			 Workers — 81 586 667 
			 Members of public 1 2 n/a 3 
			 Total 1 81 586 670 
			 Workers — 78 152 230 
			 Members of public — 1 n/a 1 
			 Total — 78 152 231 
			 Workers 1 9 27 37 
			 Members of public — — n/a — 
			 Total 1 9 27 37 
			 Workers 1 15 63 79 
			 Members of public — — n/a — 
			 Total 1 15 63 79 
			 2003–04 
			 Workers 2 64 491 557 
			 Members of public — 1 n/a 1 
			 Total 2 64 491 558 
			 Workers 3 59 144 206 
			 Members of public — 1 n/a 1 
			 Total 3 59 144 207 
			 Workers — 13 37 50 
			 Members of public — — n/a — 
			 Total — 13 37 50 
			 Workers 1 18 72 91 
			 Members of public — — n/a — 
			 Total 1 18 72 91 
			  
			 2004–052 
			 Workers — 76 340 416 
			 Members of public — 1 n/a 1 
			 Total — 76 340 417 
			 Workers — 64 140 204 
			 Members of public — — n/a — 
			 Total — 64 140 204 
			 Workers — 10 19 29 
			 Members of public — 1 n/a 1 
			 Total — 10 19 30 
			 Workers — 19 64 83 
			 Members of public — 1 n/a 1 
			 Total — 19 64 84 
			 Total 48 1,882 8,876 10,823 
		
	
	n/a=not applicable
	(38) Prior to 2000–01 the activities of refining and oil and gas storage could not be separately identified from other activities also included in the top-level industry coding in use at this time.
	(39) Provisional.

Graveyards

Barry Sheerman: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what steps the Health and Safety Executive is taking to ensure safety in graveyards from headstones; and what guidance the Health and Safety Executive has issued to burial authorities about the safety of headstones.

Anne McGuire: On this issue, HSE supports the Department for Constitutional Affairs (DCA), who have overall responsibility for burial law, to ensure that the safety of headstones is taken into account as part of the overall management of cemeteries. In 2004, the Chairman of the Health and Safety Commission wrote to all Local authority Chief Executives, setting out the need for a sensitive and proportionate approach to headstone safety. HSE is now assisting the DCA in preparing advice, which, following consultation, they plan to publish later this year.

Hazardous Cargoes

Tim Boswell: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what action he is taking in conjunction with (a) the Health and Safety Executive and (b) (i) local and (ii) maritime authorities to improve safety in the handling of hazardous cargoes at ports and terminals.

Anne McGuire: Safety standards in the transport and handling of hazardous cargoes at ports and terminals are improved and maintained through an inspection and enforcement regime operated by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE), the Maritime and Coastguard Agency (MCA) and Statutory Harbour Authorities, which considers the type of cargo handled and any specific risks associated with the cargo.
	Specifically, this is achieved through the Control of Major Accident Hazard Regulations 1999 and planning requirements (the Planning (Hazardous Substances) Regulations 1992). All establishments wishing to hold certain hazardous substances above a threshold quantity (the threshold for LNG for example is 15 tonnes) must apply to the Hazardous Substances Authority for a hazardous substances consent. HSE is a statutory consultee under the regulations and carries out risk assessments to enable it to advise on the health and safety risks.
	The assessments which are carried out in relation to Consents consider the risks to people in the vicinity of a major hazards establishment. The assessments are rigorous and detailed taking in all aspect within HSE's remit.
	COMAH is the principal legislation dealing with the operation of major hazard establishments. COMAH applies to specified quantities and types of substances. The aim of the regulation is to prevent major accidents involving dangerous substances and limit the consequences of any incidents to people and the environment.
	COMAH requirements are necessarily robust, the requirements are proportionate to the hazards and risks but the sites with the highest quantities of major hazards substances are subject to a safety report regime which requires a demonstration that all measures necessary have been taken to prevent major accidents and to limit the consequences to people and the environment of any that do occur.
	Both the COMAH requirements and the criteria for carrying out assessments in relation to consents are updated and improved in the light of advances in technology and experience. This is an ongoing process.

Household Income

Greg Clark: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions to what extent differences between poverty levels are recorded on a (a) before and (b) after housing costs basis attributable to the use of different equivalisation scales.

Margaret Hodge: Households Below Average Income (HBAI): 1994–95 to 2004–05 was published on 9 March 2006 and is available in the Library.
	Results in the publication for both Before and After Housing Costs use the same equivalisation scale. Equalisation is a formula applied to household income to enable the comparison of households of different sizes and composition. The main results reported in the latest edition of HBAI were equivalised using the McClements equivalence scale.

Lone Parents

Rosie Cooper: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions 
	(1)  what proportion of lone parents in West Lancashire moved from income support to (a) incapacity benefit, (b) jobseeker's allowance, (c) other out-of-work benefits and (d) employment when their youngest child reached 16 years old in the last period for which figures are available; and if he will make a statement;
	(2)  what proportion of lone parents in Coventry South have moved from income support to (a) incapacity benefit and (b) jobseeker's allowance since 1997.

James Plaskitt: holding answer 13 March 2006
	Due to the very small numbers of claimants involved it is not possible to accurately estimate the information below national level.
	For the available national figures, I refer the hon. Member to the written answer I gave the hon. Member for Yeovil (Mr. Laws) on 16 March 2006, Official Report, columns 2458W-59W.

Mental Health

Ben Chapman: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what steps he is taking to support people with mental health problems in finding employment.

Margaret Hodge: Our Welfare Reform Green Paper sets out proposals that will build on the success of Pathways to Work. To ensure our reforms are successful and that we deliver the best services possible, we are working with customers and their representatives, employers and medical professionals to increase awareness of the needs of all groups, including those with mental health conditions. We know that nearly four out of 10 people who claim incapacity benefit have a mental health condition and the longer people remain on the benefit; the more likely they are to develop mental health conditions.
	One of the key principles of Pathways to Work is inclusion and support for all, and it is important that claimants attend and participate in their scheduled work-focused interviews to maintain contact and take advantage of the support that is on offer. Everyone who wants to work, whatever their health condition or disability, should get the appropriate help and support to enable them to work as soon as they are able to do so. With that support the prospects for the majority of people are good. To provide this advice and support we have invested heavily in training for personal advisers and in condition management programmes in Pathways to Work areas.
	We intend to develop our work with health service providers to meet the particular needs of those with mental health conditions, many of whom are likely to require ongoing support, whether they return to work or remain in receipt of benefits.

National Insurance Numbers

David Drew: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what the average waiting time is for an overseas national to obtain a national insurance number (a) in-county and (b) from abroad.

James Plaskitt: The information is not available in the format requested. The average clearance time for national insurance number applications in Great Britain between April 2005 and February 2006 is 20 days. national insurance numbers can only be applied for by persons resident in the UK.

National Pension Day

Michael Weir: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what the cost was of staging each of the National Pension Day events held on 18 March.

Philip Hammond: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what the total cost was to the Government of the Pensions Day events and activities on 18 March, including his Department's website survey.

Stephen Timms: The information is not available in the format requested.
	Opinion Leader Research is contracted to this Department to deliver the National Pensions Day events, the regional events, the website survey, the stakeholder toolkit and analysis of all of the National Pensions Debate feedback. This work is not yet concluded.
	The total costs invoiced to date are £794,130. The total cost is expected to be just under £1 million.

New Deal for Lone Parents

Tim Boswell: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what the average (a) duration and (b) cost was of a work-focused interview under the New Deal for Lone Parents in the latest period for which figures are available.

Margaret Hodge: On average, an adviser spends up to an hour on a lone parent work focused interview. This time covers any preparatory work connected to the interview such as the in work benefit calculation as well as the interview itself. The average cost of a lone parent work focused interview is currently £34.

Office Equipment

Michael Weir: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what the annual expenditure on (a) fixtures and fittings, (b) general office expenses and (c) office equipment was of his (i) Department and (ii) each (A) non-departmental public body, (B) executive agency and (C) other public body for which his Department is responsible in (1) Scotland, (2) Wales, (3) each English region and (4) Northern Ireland in each of the last three financial years; and what the planned expenditure is for 2005–06 in each case.

Anne McGuire: A full response is not available from standard information system in the format requested and could only be obtained at disproportionate cost. A partial response can be provided using the closest categories used by the department to those requested.
	The Department's estate has been sold under a PFI partnership deal to Land Securities Trillium and payments are as a whole for fully serviced accommodation facilities. A breakdown in the format requested could be provided only at disproportionate costs.
	With regard to each non-departmental public body, those listed operate separate accounting systems.
	
		
			   £ 
		
		
			 Remploy Ltd   
			 2002–03 (a) fixtures and fittings and (c) Office Equipment 1,494,000 
			  (b) General Office Expenses 2,538,000 
			 2003–04 (a) fixtures and fittings (c) Office Equipment 1,429,000 
			  (b) General Office Expenses: 2,461,000 
			 2004–05 (a) fixtures and fittings and (c) Office Equipment 2,148,000 
			  (b) General Office Expenses 2,084,000 
			 Plan for 2005–06 (a) fixtures and fittings and (c) Office Equipment 1,368,000 
			  (b) General Office Expenses 1,614,000 
			
			 Independent Living Funds (ILF) 
			 2002–03 (a) fixtures and fittings 0 
			  (b) General Office Expenses 49,040 
			  (c) Office Equipment 2,737 
			 2003–04 (a) fixtures and fittings 0 
			  (b) General Office Expenses 36,194 
			  (c) Office Equipment 33,076 
			 2004–05 (a) fixtures and fittings 0 
			  (b) General Office Expenses 47,520 
			  (c) Office Equipment 1,597 
			 Plan for 2005–06 (a) fixtures and fittings 0 
			  (b) General Office Expenses 50,220 
			  (c) Office Equipment 10,000 
			
			 Disability Rights Commission (DRC) 
			 2002–03 (a) fixtures and fittings (Breakdown= S:£31,986, W:£6,645, L:£966, NW:£10,978) 50,575 
			  (b) General Office Expenses 2,054,000 
			  (c) Office Equipment 21,000 
			 2003–04 (a) fixtures and fittings (Breakdown= S:£2,882, NW:£27,257) 30,139 
			  (b) General Office Expenses 1,521,000 
			  (c) Office Equipment 19,000 
			 2004–05 (a) fixtures and fittings (Breakdown= S:£15,236, NW:£45,936) 61,172 
			  (b) General Office Expenses 1,718,000 
			  (c) Office Equipment 22,000 
			 Plan for 2005–06 (a) fixtures and fittings (Breakdown= S:£8,432, NW:£62,793) 71,225 
			  (b) General Office Expenses 1,555,002 
			  (c) Office Equipment 22,000 
			
			 Private Pensions Fund (PPF) Established 6 April 2005 
			 Plan for 2005–06 (a) fixtures and fittings 0 
			  (b) General Office Expenses 170,000 
			  (c) Office Equipment 0 
			
			 Pensions Ombudsman (PO)   
			 2002–03 (a) fixtures and fittings (40)n/a 
			  (b) General Office Expenses 12,300 
			  (c) Office Equipment 0 
			 2003–04 (a) fixtures and fittings (40)n/a 
			  (b) General Office Expenses 9,000 
			  (c) Office Equipment 0 
			 2004–05 (a) fixtures and fittings (40)n/a 
			  (b) General Office Expenses 8,400 
			  (c) Office Equipment 2,400 
			 Plan for 2005–06 (a) fixtures and fittings (40)n/a 
			  (b) General Office Expenses 9,500 
			  (c) Office Equipment 20,000 
			
			 The Pensions Regular (TPR) Established 6 April 2005 
			 Plan for 2005–06 Breakdown between fixtures and fittings, General Office Expenses and Office Equipment:  not available. 2,219,000 
		
	
	n/a=Not available.
	(40) Likely to be small.
	Jobcentre Plus, The Pension Service, The Child Support Agency, The Disability and Carers Service and The Appeals Service are all included within the Department's contract with land Securities Trillium. Details below relate to those agencies which are not covered by the contract with Land Securities Trillium.
	
		
			   £ 
		
		
			 The Rent Service only became part of DWP in April 2004 
			 2004–05 (a) Fixtures and Fittings 592,311 
			  (b) General Office Expenses 1,926,650 
			  (c) Office Equipment 22, 394 
			 2005–06 (a) Fixtures and Fittings 337,738 
			  (b) General Office Expenses 1,678,259 
			  (c) Office Equipment 17,471 
			
			 Health and Safety Executive(41) 
			 2002–03 (a) Fixtures and Fittings 2,003,000 
			  (b) General Office Expenses 74,195,000 
			  (c) Office Equipment 508,000 
			 2003–04 (a) Fixtures and Fittings 654,000 
			  (b) General Office Expenses 74,910,000 
			  (c) Office Equipment 557,000 
			 2004–05 (a) Fixtures and Fittings 3,403,000 
			  (b) General Office Expenses 88,346,000 
			  (c) Office Equipment 529,000 
			 2005–06 (a) Fixtures and Fittings 986,000 
			  (b) General Office Expenses 94,133,000 
			  (c) Office Equipment 508,000 
		
	
	(41) The figures show the total position for HSE (including the Health & Safety Laboratory which is an agency of HSE). This information is not held in a national/regionalised form. The figures for Fixtures and fittings and Office equipment relate only to capital expenditure, Office equipment includes IT General office expenses figures includes all general administrative expenditure (GAE) eg: communications, IT services, consultancy, office consumables, miscellaneous staff costs, utilities, rent, rates facilities management etc.
	Other public body for which his Department is responsible.
	
		
			   £ 
		
		
			 Motability   
			 2002–03 (a) fixtures and fittings 44,490 
			  (b) General Office Expenses 235,475 
			  (c) Office Equipment 42,775 
			 2003–04 (a) fixtures and fittings 40,381 
			  (b) General Office Expenses 198,789 
			  (c) Office Equipment 41,232 
			 2004–05 (a) fixtures and fittings 83,042 
			  (b) General Office Expenses 158,491 
			  (c) Office Equipment 54,061 
			 Plan for 2005–06 (a) fixtures and fittings 76,137 
			  (b) General Office Expenses 180,675 
			  (c) Office Equipment 56,559 
			
			 The Pensions Advisory Service (TPAS) 
			 2002–03 (a) fixtures and fittings 1,292 
			  (b) General Office Expenses 72,127 
			  (c) Office Equipment 12,235 
			 2003–04 (a) fixtures and fittings 0 
			  (b) General Office Expenses 88,930 
			  (c) Office Equipment 24,836 
			 2004–05 (a) fixtures and fittings 0 
			  (b) General Office Expenses 92,139 
			  (c) Office Equipment 14,292 
			 Plan for 2005–06 (a) fixtures and fittings 0 
			  (b) General Office Expenses 111,000 
			  (c) Office Equipment 200

Public Relations Companies

Michael Weir: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions if he will list the public relations companies that have had contracts with (a) his Department, (b) each (i) non-departmental public body and (ii) executive agency for which his Department is responsible and (c) independent statutory bodies, organisations and bodies financially sponsored by his Department and other such organisations since May 1997.

Anne McGuire: The Department for Work and Pensions was formed in June 2001 from the Department of Social Security and parts of the former Department for Education and Employment including the Employment Service. The information provided relates to this date onwards.
	The Department has had a mixture of framework agreements, in which pre-qualified groups of suppliers compete for contractual assignments as they arise as well as fully specified contracts awarded to individual suppliers at the outset.
	The information available is as follows and is shown separately for framework agreement contracts and specific PR contracts for the Department and its agencies.
	The following companies have had framework agreement with the Department or its agencies. Our systems do not allow us to show separately the information for individual departmental agencies from the departmental information.
	Geronimo
	Hill & Knowlton
	The Foster Company
	Trimedia Communications UK Ltd.
	Fishburn Hedges
	August One
	Harrison Cowley
	Porter Novelli
	Citigate
	Consolidated Communications
	Euro RSCG Biss
	Munroe & Foster
	QBO Bell Pottinger
	COI
	Band and Brown.
	The following have had specific PR contracts:
	Geronimo
	The Forster Company
	Citigate Communications
	Band and Brown
	Fishburn Hedges
	Beattie Communications
	Pergoda
	GCI (UK).
	Non-departmental public bodies for which the Department is responsible:
	Health and Safety Executive
	GCI (UK)
	AS Biss & Co.
	Disability Rights Commission
	Exposure
	Eloqui
	PR21
	Furner Communications.
	Independent statutory bodies organisations and bodies financially sponsored by this Department and other such organisations:
	Private Pensions Fund
	Fishburn Hedges
	The Pensions Regulator
	Fishburn Hedges
	Hill & Knowlton
	Citigate Dewe Rogerson
	Remploy
	Martin Adeney Associates
	David Felton Media Consultancy
	Warwick Emanuel
	Compro PR
	Impact Press and PR
	Harris Associates
	Nexus.

Children in Custody

Lynne Jones: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department pursuant to the answer of 13 March 2006 to question 47527, on children in custody, how many young persons held in prison establishments were held in adult prisons in each of the last three years.

Fiona Mactaggart: On 30 June 2003 there were eight persons aged under 18 held in adult prisons; on 30 June 2004 five such persons were held in adult prisons; and on 30 June 2005 two such persons were held in adult prisons. All of these persons were female and held in female prisons, in accommodation specially set aside for juveniles on young offender wings. Under 17-year-old girls are no longer placed within the Prison Service estate, unless exceptional circumstances apply in an individual case; and four dedicated units, within the Prison Service estate, have now been created for 17-year-old girls; a fifth is due to open later this year.

Community Support Officers

Daniel Kawczynski: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many community support officers there are in Shropshire; and how many are dedicated to patrolling rural areas.

Hazel Blears: The Shropshire Basic Command Unit (BCD) had 14 Community Support Officers (CSOs) on 30 June 2005. Deployment of CSOs is an operational matter for the Chief Constable.

Criminal Justice System

Claire Curtis-Thomas: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether an integrated technology system based upon a common language and common electronic case files has been introduced to the criminal justice system.

Fiona Mactaggart: The Criminal Justice System (CJS) Information Technology (CJS IT) Programme was set up in spring 2002, in response to the "Justice for All" Government White Paper, with the following vision: "By 31 March 2008, anyone involved in the CJS-users of it or people working within it should have access from any browser enabled device, to a seamless, coherent set of computer systems and information to cover the breadth of their dealings".
	Considerable progress has been made in achieving this, with 100 percent. of the underlying server hardware, computers and desktop applications is now in place across the police, the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), the Magistrates' and Crown courts, prisons and probation. The CPS completed deployment of its case management system in 2003 and the case management systems for the police and Magistrates' Courts are expected to be substantially complete by March 2007. Key to achieving this joined-up vision is the CJS Exchange, which is part of the CJS IT Programme.
	This will transport data between the various case management systems, transforming data as required. The CJS Exchange has been designed to cope with all languages. Already, the CJS Exchange is making the exchange of case file data between the police and the CPS possible in Humberside and a further link will enter full live operation in Avon and Somerset in March 2006.
	The CJS Exchange is also providing a secure website that, by the end of March, will give all appropriate staff within a Crown Court's catchment area access to hearing information that was previously only available within the courthouse itself. In early March, connectivity between the probation service and prison services offender assessment systems across all 42 areas was completed; currently there are over 810,000 completed assessments on the probation system and over 62,000 completed assessments on the prison system.
	If deployments go to plan, initial indications are that, by March 2007, 70 percent. of the CJS areas are expected to have connected their case management systems to the CJS Exchange.
	The CJS Exchange is also to be used for the National Enforcement Service's pathfinder pilot in the North of England.

Critical Infrastructure Protection

Jim Cousins: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will place in the Library the Government's response to the EU paper on critical infrastructure protection.

Charles Clarke: Copies of the Government's response to the European Commission's Green Paper on "Protection of Critical Infrastructure" have today been placed in the Library.

Danish Embassy Protests

Laurence Robertson: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many arrests have been made following the protests outside the Danish Embassy in London on 4 February.

Hazel Blears: The Commissioner of the Metropolitan police tells me that, on 15 March, five men were arrested in connection with offences believed to have been committed during a demonstration in central London on 3 February 2006. Three have been charged and two have been bailed pending further investigations.

Home Curfews

Henry Bellingham: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many prisoners were released from each prison on home detention curfew in each of the last 12 months for which figures are available.

Fiona Mactaggart: Information on the number of prisoners released from prison establishments in England and Wales on home detention curfew (HOC), by prison establishment, January to December 2005, is in the following table.
	
		Prisoners released on home detention curfew between January and December 2005, by prison establishment and region
		
			  2005 
			  January February March April May June 
		
		
			 All establishments 1,337 1,337 1,615 1,492 1,517 1,421 
			
			 Acklington 4 9 5 6 7 6 
			 Albany 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Altcourse 20 9 23 30 18 19 
			 Ashfield 1 0 0 0 0 2 
			 Ashwell 13 12 15 9 12 9 
			 Askham Grange 6 3 6 4 8 11 
			 Aylesbury 2 2 0 0 1 1 
			 Bedford 14 13 10 14 20 15 
			 Belmarsh 4 1 2 16 10 1 
			 Birmingham 41 34 46 37 43 40 
			 Blakenhurst 14 19 28 23 30 33 
			 Blantyre House 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Blundeston 1 0 1 3 4 2 
			 Brinsford 2 8 10 9 7 4 
			 Bristol 2 3 6 2 5 7 
			 Brixton 4 2 1 3 2 3 
			 Brockhill 1 4 2 4 4 4 
			 Bronzefield 7 7 4 8 2 5 
			 Buckley Hall 16 15 25 16 26 24 
			 Bullingdon 13 17 19 27 29 23 
			 Bullwood Hall 2 6 4 4 7 8 
			 Camp Hill 4 5 5 5 5 4 
			 Canterbury 17 10 18 15 14 13 
			 Cardiff 16 10 27 9 9 23 
			 Castington 5 2 2 5 1 1 
			 Channings Wood 3 6 8 9 7 3 
			 Chelmsford 2 3 3 4 1 0 
			 Coldingley 2 0 0 2 3 3 
			 Cookham Wood 5 7 3 9 10 8 
			 Dartmoor 6 2 5 4 7 7 
			 Deerbolt 12 9 16 13 19 10 
			 Doncaster 25 25 33 24 17 35 
			 Dorchester 5 4 1 6 2 2 
			 Dovegate 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Dover 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Downview 12 12 9 10 8 8 
			 Drake Hall 8 11 17 16 12 13 
			 Durham 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Durham 11 15 28 22 20 15 
			 East Sutton Park 2 1 3 3 1 2 
			 Eastwood Park 9 11 12 10 15 10 
			 Edmunds Hill 0 4 19 12 11 7 
			 Elmley 12 10 7 7 5 5 
			 Erlestoke 4 7 9 8 12 4 
			 Everthorpe 6 4 7 7 7 5 
			 Exeter 6 7 10 7 8 16 
			 Featherstone 7 9 7 9 8 15 
			 Feltham 1 0 1 3 1 2 
			 Ford 36 48 42 43 52 48 
			 Forest Bank 9 10 12 12 15 4 
			 Foston Hall 9 8 6 6 4 6 
			 Frankland 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Full Sutton 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Garth 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Gartree 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Glen Parva 28 24 41 38 34 18 
			 Gloucester 5 4 3 3 7 2 
			 Grendon 14 19 27 13 18 22 
			 Guys Marsh 9 17 12 12 26 21 
			 Haslar 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Hatfield/Moorland open 23 35 32 37 25 21 
			 Haverigg 7 5 8 8 15 5 
			 Hewell Grange 23 20 25 23 18 18 
			 Highdown 6 13 12 7 8 14 
			 Highpoint 17 12 15 11 6 9 
			 Hindley 7 1 4 3 2 2 
			 Hollesley Bay 17 16 27 13 23 30 
			 Holloway 7 9 10 13 21 10 
			 Holme House 7 6 7 5 8 19 
			 Hull 18 10 15 10 8 8 
			 Huntercombe 0 2 3 4 4 0 
			 Kingston 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Kirkham 65 52 73 57 76 51 
			 Kirklevington 2 3 3 1 3 2 
			 Lancaster 3 7 5 5 3 3 
			 Lancaster Farms 10 18 11 9 17 5 
			 Latchmere House 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Leeds 32 19 29 27 19 24 
			 Leicester 5 5 1 3 3 5 
			 Lewes 1 3 7 6 4 4 
			 Leyhill 21 14 22 27 24 22 
			 Lincoln 7 9 5 15 4 4 
			 Lindholme 11 11 15 15 20 17 
			 Littlehey 4 2 3 3 1 3 
			 Liverpool 24 26 18 24 15 26 
			 Long Lartin 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Low Newton 21 7 14 13 12 5 
			 Lowdham Grange 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Maidstone 0 0 0 1 0 0 
			 Manchester 13 13 14 14 11 18 
			 Moorland 6 7 16 10 11 11 
			 Morton Hall 7 8 5 9 3 5 
			 New Hall 13 7 18 23 18 18 
			 North Sea Camp 40 28 44 43 31 28 
			 Northallerton 21 20 38 27 37 32 
			 Norwich 13 12 9 18 11 8 
			 Nottingham 4 1 2 9 1 1 
			 Onley 30 34 28 28 25 30 
			 Parc 21 16 12 27 15 21 
			 Parkhurst 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Pentonville 20 24 15 16 9 20 
			 Peterborough 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Portland 20 15 18 8 9 11 
			 Preston 4 10 2 4 2 6 
			 Ranby 21 19 27 19 25 26 
			 Reading 12 8 6 3 9 8 
			 Risley 7 11 14 10 8 6 
			 Rochester 13 9 20 11 13 15 
			 Rye Hill 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Send 6 8 4 4 9 3 
			 Shepton Mallet 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Shrewsbury 9 7 10 8 9 4 
			 Stafford 4 1 5 7 2 6 
			 Standford Hill 30 39 46 34 44 35 
			 Stocken 5 8 2 7 12 2 
			 Stoke Heath 6 15 9 10 11 18 
			 Styal 13 12 11 14 11 10 
			 Sudbury 13 25 30 33 38 31 
			 Swaleside 0 0 0 0 1 0 
			 Swansea 5 11 14 7 7 9 
			 Swinfen Hall 0 0 0 0 1 2 
			 The Mount 12 10 14 11 7 0 
			 The Wolds 1 0 2 6 4 3 
			 Thorn Cross 31 28 22 22 32 29 
			 Usk 18 17 23 15 21 11 
			 Verne 0 3 2 1 5 3 
			 Wakefield 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Wandsworth 4 6 14 5 11 4 
			 Warren Hill 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Wayland 2 5 8 1 2 5 
			 Wealstun 28 32 31 26 27 31 
			 Weare 16 26 30 30 25 21 
			 Wellingborough 7 7 8 8 6 7 
			 Werrington 0 0 0 0 2 0 
			 Wetherby 1 1 0 2 3 1 
			 Whatton 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Whitemoor 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Winchester 27 30 36 23 27 21 
			 Woodhill 13 9 7 4 6 19 
			 Wormwood Scrubs 19 19 29 28 18 15 
			 Wymott 7 3 6 6 5 11 
		
	
	
		
			  2005 
			  July August September October November December 
		
		
			 All establishments 1,434 1,452 1,480 1,338 1,450 1,473 
			
			 Acklington 10 6 11 7 16 5 
			 Albany 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Altcourse 19 36 42 19 21 16 
			 Ashfield 1 0 0 1 0 1 
			 Ashwell 8 14 12 9 13 8 
			 Askham Grange 4 4 4 6 6 7 
			 Aylesbury 1 3 0 0 1 1 
			 Bedford 18 15 17 17 16 13 
			 Belmarsh 13 9 10 6 5 15 
			 Birmingham 28 13 24 31 29 34 
			 Blakenhurst 28 19 28 24 24 31 
			 Blantyre House 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Blundeston 2 3 2 4 1 5 
			 Brinsford 6 4 2 4 0 1 
			 Bristol 5 2 5 1 4 2 
			 Brixton 8 5 6 2 5 14 
			 Brockhill 4 4 4 3 1 0 
			 Bronzefield 4 6 5 5 2 3 
			 Buckley Hall 34 22 28 16 4 0 
			 Bullingdon 19 27 27 22 23 28 
			 Bullwood Hall 1 6 8 2 3 5 
			 Camp Hill 6 6 4 4 4 6 
			 Canterbury 9 19 10 14 20 11 
			 Cardiff 22 14 15 13 13 14 
			 Castington 3 0 3 0 2 2 
			 Channings Wood 12 9 10 8 13 7 
			 Chelmsford 2 1 4 4 6 5 
			 Coldingley 1 1 4 2 4 0 
			 Cookham Wood 12 8 7 9 11 8 
			 Dartmoor 7 3 3 5 4 4 
			 Deerbolt 13 20 14 11 8 12 
			 Doncaster 26 26 28 21 24 27 
			 Dorchester 7 4 3 3 6 4 
			 Dovegate 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Dover 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Downview 3 6 1 2 7 8 
			 Drake Hall 12 15 17 9 10 16 
			 Durham 19 14 9 19 25 17 
			 Durham 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 East Sutton Park 2 0 0 2 0 1 
			 Eastwood Park 13 9 15 12 9 21 
			 Edmunds Hill 9 11 21 14 21 22 
			 Elmley 1 3 6 4 6 8 
			 Erlestoke 7 4 3 6 5 3 
			 Everthorpe 14 5 6 15 12 29 
			 Exeter 11 14 19 15 11 12 
			 Featherstone 11 14 8 13 12 13 
			 Feltham 1 1 2 0 0 3 
			 Ford 43 55 55 40 49 60 
			 Forest Bank 11 10 10 15 21 13 
			 Foston Hall 9 9 3 4 6 10 
			 Frankland 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Full Sutton 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Garth 0 0 0 0 1 1 
			 Gartree 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Glen Parva 31 23 30 31 23 35 
			 Gloucester 2 5 5 4 1 3 
			 Grendon 19 15 15 20 25 16 
			 Guys Marsh 15 16 16 10 23 10 
			 Haslar 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Hatfield/Moorland open 21 26 23 29 20 23 
			 Haverigg 8 10 9 10 6 11 
			 Hewell Grange 8 14 10 6 15 11 
			 Highdown 13 13 9 10 15 16 
			 Highpoint 3 12 10 15 17 14 
			 Hindley 2 1 3 1 3 0 
			 Hollesley Bay 29 28 25 18 33 13 
			 Holloway 17 12 5 11 14 14 
			 Holme House 14 18 12 9 11 21 
			 Hull 7 5 9 7 6 9 
			 Huntercombe 4 1 3 3 2 4 
			 Kingston 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Kirkham 74 66 55 63 66 63 
			 Kirklevington 2 5 2 3 0 0 
			 Lancaster 7 3 6 3 1 3 
			 Lancaster Farms 8 7 5 2 4 3 
			 Latchmere House 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Leeds 21 20 22 18 16 20 
			 Leicester 1 3 5 4 4 6 
			 Lewes 2 4 5 2 6 2 
			 Leyhill 25 15 39 20 22 32 
			 Lincoln 3 3 2 2 2 3 
			 Lindholme 14 13 16 17 15 19 
			 Littlehey 1 2 1 1 2 3 
			 Liverpool 23 32 23 9 27 15 
			 Long Lartin 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Low Newton 15 9 17 15 11 16 
			 Lowdham Grange 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Maidstone 0 0 0 0 0 1 
			 Manchester 6 17 23 23 14 8 
			 Moorland 2 8 7 16 13 16 
			 Morton Hall 10 7 6 9 9 14 
			 New Hall 6 13 12 13 15 8 
			 North Sea Camp 27 31 31 21 31 25 
			 Northallerton 41 29 36 33 34 43 
			 Norwich 8 9 6 7 8 9 
			 Nottingham 2 2 2 1 3 2 
			 Onley 25 28 29 23 31 29 
			 Parc 12 15 13 11 23 25 
			 Parkhurst 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Pentonville 19 8 10 5 4 8 
			 Peterborough 23 31 31 32 41 31 
			 Portland 5 7 3 11 10 7 
			 Preston 9 4 7 9 4 5 
			 Ranby 24 22 21 28 20 25 
			 Reading 8 15 11 18 6 9 
			 Risley 15 16 13 8 17 15 
			 Rochester 10 15 18 12 10 18 
			 Rye Hill 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Send 10 9 14 7 6 6 
			 Shepton Mallet 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Shrewsbury 7 4 4 7 7 10 
			 Stafford 3 3 5 2 12 6 
			 Standford Hill 33 43 40 27 34 28 
			 Stocken 7 6 12 6 8 7 
			 Stoke Heath 7 17 17 13 17 14 
			 Styal 6 16 10 15 9 10 
			 Sudbury 40 40 28 25 26 24 
			 Swaleside 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Swansea 5 10 9 10 5 8 
			 Swinfen Hall 0 2 1 3 1 3 
			 The Mount 6 7 4 3 4 4 
			 The Wolds 3 0 4 1 2 0 
			 Thorn Cross 25 21 34 26 18 15 
			 Usk 22 18 17 12 12 15 
			 Verne 6 3 3 4 3 1 
			 Wakefield 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Wandsworth 10 10 2 8 5 8 
			 Warren Hill 0 1 1 0 1 0 
			 Wayland 3 8 7 11 7 4 
			 Wealstun 27 25 24 23 25 34 
			 Weare 8 2 0 0 0 0 
			 Wellingborough 6 11 5 7 9 9 
			 Werrington 1 0 0 1 0 0 
			 Wetherby 1 3 1 2 1 3 
			 Whatton 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Whitemoor 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Winchester 18 21 26 21 26 20 
			 Woodhill 12 10 9 3 12 12 
			 Wormwood Scrubs 24 23 25 30 22 18 
			 Wymott 4 2 2 5 11 5 
		
	
	These statistics are based on information recorded on the central Prison Service IT system on 15 March 2006. Further updates and amendments may be made to records on this system in future resulting in revised figures.

Home Detention Curfews

Henry Bellingham: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department which prisons operate a Home Detention Curfew scheme; what the rate of recall of those under such curfews was in each establishment in the last year for which figures are available; and if he will make a statement.

Fiona Mactaggart: Prisoners who are held in Prison Service establishments and contracted prisons in England and Wales may be considered for early release under the Home Detention Curfew (HDC) scheme if they meet the statutory and administrative eligibility criteria.
	The Secretary of State may recall a prisoner subject to the HDC scheme if they: breach the conditions of the curfew; cannot be electronically monitored, or; are considered to present a risk of serious harm. Information on the number of prisoners released on HDC, the number of recalls from HDC and the rate of recall, by establishment released from, is given in the following table. Comparisons need to be treated with caution given the different types of prisoners held by different establishments.
	
		Number of releases and recalls of prisoners on Home Detention Curfew by prison establishment released from: January to December 2005
		
			  Number of releases Number of recalls Recalls as a percentage of releases 
		
		
			 All establishments 17,323 2,597 15 
			 Acklington 92 20 22 
			 Altcourse 270 42 16 
			 Ashfield 6 6 * 
			 Ashwell 133 31 23 
			 Askham Grange 67 4 6 
			 Aylesbury 12 1 * 
			 Bedford 182 22 12 
			 Belmarsh 92 14 15 
			 Birmingham 399 85 21 
			 Blakenhurst 299 30 10 
			 Blundeston 28 11 * 
			 Brinsford 57 23 40 
			 Bristol 44 10 23 
			 Brixton 55 9 16 
			 Brockhill 35 4 * 
			 Bronzefield 58 8 14 
			 Buckley Hall 226 55 24 
			 Bullingdon 274 38 14 
			 Bulwood Hall 56 6 11 
			 Camp Hill 58 13 22 
			 Canterbury 168 37 22 
			 Cardiff 183 28 15 
			 Castington 26 4 * 
			 Channings Wood 94 21 22 
			 Chelmsford 35 0 * 
			 Coldingley 22 8 * 
			 Cookham Wood 95 21 22 
			 Dartmoor 53 7 13 
			 Deerbolt 154 36 23 
			 Doncaster 311 48 15 
			 Dorchester 46 4 * 
			 Downview 86 20 23 
			 Drake Hall 155 18 12 
			 Durham 214 23 11 
			 East Sutton Park 17 1 * 
			 Eastwood Park 146 13 9 
			 Edmunds Hill 150 24 16 
			 Elmley 74 11 15 
			 Erlestoke 71 11 15 
			 Everthorpe 116 21 18 
			 Exeter 136 12 9 
			 Featherstone 125 24 19 
			 Feltham 15 5 * 
			 Ford 569 28 5 
			 Forest Bank 142 17 12 
			 Foston Hall 79 17 22 
			 Garth 2 0 * 
			 Glen Parva 354 71 20 
			 Gloucester 44 11 * 
			 Grendon 222 10 5 
			 Guys Marsh 185 33 18 
			 Haverigg 102 25 25 
			 Hewell Grange 190 18 9 
			 Highdown 135 13 10 
			 Highpoint 141 28 20 
			 Hindley 29 10 * 
			 Hollesley Bay 272 28 10 
			 Holloway 143 19 13 
			 Holme House 137 15 11 
			 Hull 112 13 12 
			 Huntercombe 28 9 * 
			 Kirkham 760 52 7 
			 Kirklevington 25 3 * 
			 Lancaster 49 11 * 
			 Lancaster Farms 99 26 26 
			 Leeds 266 57 21 
			 Leicester 45 5 * 
			 Lewes 46 11 24 
			 Leyhill 282 21 7 
			 Lincoln 59 4 7 
			 Lindholme 183 40 22 
			 Littlehey 26 2 * 
			 Liverpool 261 30 11 
			 Low Newton 154 24 16 
			 Maidstone 2 1 * 
			 Manchester 174 23 13 
			 Moorland 122 27 22 
			 Moorland Open 316 44 14 
			 Morton Hall 92 10 11 
			 New Hall 163 29 18 
			 North Sea Camp 378 22 6 
			 Northallerton 390 105 27 
			 Norwich 117 21 18 
			 Nottingham 30 3 * 
			 Onley 340 61 18 
			 Pare 210 22 10 
			 Pentonville 158 29 18 
			 Peterborough 204 24 12 
			 Portland 123 19 15 
			 Preston 66 9 14 
			 Ranby 276 51 18 
			 Reading 113 14 12 
			 Risley 139 22 16 
			 Rochester 164 31 19 
			 Send 86 16 19 
			 Shrewsbury 86 13 15 
			 Stafford 56 18 32 
			 Standford Hill 433 39 9 
			 Stocken 82 19 23 
			 Stoke Heath 155 22 14 
			 Styal 136 21 15 
			 Sudbury 352 34 10 
			 Swaleside 1 0 * 
			 Swansea 100 9 9 
			 Swinfen Hall 13 3 * 
			 The Mount 82 12 15 
			 The Wolds 26 9 * 
			 Thorn Cross 300 65 22 
			 Usk 200 24 12 
			 Verne 33 16 * 
			 Wandsworth 87 2 2 
			 Warren Hill 3 1 * 
			 Wayland 63 10 16 
			 Wealstun 333 25 8 
			 Weare 158 38 24 
			 Wellingborough 90 17 19 
			 Werrington 4 4 * 
			 Wetherby 19 7 * 
			 Winchester 296 36 12 
			 Woodhill 115 16 14 
			 Wormwood Scrubs 267 47 18 
			 Wymott 67 15 22 
		
	
	Note:
	These statistics are based on information recorded on the central Prison Service IT system on 4 March 2006. Further updates and amendments may be made to records on this system in future resulting in revised figures.

Identity Cards

Don Foster: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how, following the introduction of identity cards, restrictions on travel will be enforced on those who have a football banning order but are required to remain in possession of his or her identity card for the purpose of access to certain services while in the UK.

Andy Burnham: The Identity Cards Bill amends the Football Spectators Act 1989 to make it clear that an identity card issued to a British citizen falls within the definition of "travel authorisation". This ensures that travel restrictions can be imposed. However, to ensure that anyone subject to restrictions for an extended period of time can demonstrate their identity for domestic purposes, they will be able to obtain an identity card which will be issued to the same standards as other cards but which will not be valid for travel. This will be achieved by not specifying the nationality of the card holder on the face of the card.

National Identity Register

Anne Main: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department 
	(1)  what contingency plans are being prepared for the rapid wholesale deletion of data held on the National Identity Register in the event of invasion by a foreign power; and if he will make a statement;
	(2)  what contingency plans are being prepared for the rapid wholesale deletion of data held on the National Identity Register in the event of a coup d'état; and if he will make a statement.

Andy Burnham: The National Identity Register will be classified as part of the nation's Critical National Infrastructure and security procedures to protect the Register will reflect this status. Security risk assessments have been conducted on issues such as the physical, logical, procedural, personnel and systems aspects of the identity card scheme to ensure such necessary procedures are implemented correctly and are sufficiently comprehensive. In addition, all security aspects of the scheme will be subject to a security accreditation process which must be passed before the scheme can be launched. However, it would not be appropriate to give more detailed information about security contingency planning for the scheme as to do so would jeopardise future integrity of such arrangements.

National Offender Management Service

Julie Morgan: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether the National Offender Management Service sought advice from the Treasury Solicitors on whether service level agreements negotiated by the National Offender Management Service and probation areas were legally binding.

Fiona Mactaggart: Advice was sought from Treasury Solicitors on whether service level agreements negotiated between Regional Offender Managers and Probation Boards were legally binding. The current legislative framework which sets out the statutory duties of probation boards remains in place until the proposed new legislation is in place, and is unchanged by the creation of service level agreements. However, the SLAs are the key mechanism for introducing commissioning, and signed SLAs will demonstrate the strength of the relationships.

Police

Chris Ruane: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many (a) police support staff, (b) community support officers and (c) special constables there were in each police authority area in England and Wales in each of the last 20 years, ranked in descending order.

Hazel Blears: The available information is given in the following table.
	
		The total strength(43) for civilians/police staff(44) by police force area (1986–2005)(45)
		
			  March 
			 Police force area 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 
		
		
			 Avon and Somerset 775 723 730 765 835 
			 Bedfordshire 307 312 326 361 377 
			 Cambridgeshire 367 394 410 414 458 
			 Cheshire 426 510 512 511 501 
			 Cleveland 313 347 360 428 431 
			 Cumbria 314 310 340 351 380 
			 Derbyshire 692 725 716 719 679 
			 Devon and Cornwall 848 873 897 891 929 
			 Dorset 421 427 434 464 485 
			 Durham 526 519 524 539 534 
			 Essex 753 809 880 951 988 
			 Gloucestershire 257 245 293 317 330 
			 Greater Manchester 1,626 1,800 1,921 1,952 2,153 
			 Hampshire 771 812 872 932 * 
			 Hertfordshire 404 433 461 485 530 
			 Humberside 542 587 640 653 673 
			 Kent 880 938 906 920 964 
			 Lancashire 895 945 1,016 1,066 * 
			 Leicestershire 453 458 499 569 632 
			 Lincolnshire 368 309 311 322 431 
			 London, City of 320 329 318 317 312 
			 Merseyside 1,176 1,249 * 1,340 1,413 
			 Metropolitan Police 13,185 13,365 13,179 12,981 13,250 
			 Norfolk 311 327 346 371 407 
			 Northamptonshire 310 320 340 351 373 
			 Northumbria 1,043 1,095 1,106 1,123 1,164 
			 North Yorkshire 335 330 358 421 433 
			 Nottinghamshire 611 568 578 606 640 
			 South Yorkshire 713 821 832 851 853 
			 Staffordshire 667 678 681 679 655 
			 Suffolk 408 403 412 424 428 
			 Surrey 420 451 470 468 520 
			 Sussex 763 818 862 898 880 
			 Thames Valley 1,188 1,161 1,182 1,187 1,267 
			 Warwickshire 301 298 313 309 330 
			 West Mercia 760 750 744 772 832 
			 West Midlands 1,514 1,688 2,057 2,115 2,236 
			 West Yorkshire 1,275 1,360 1,458 1,613 1,743 
			 Wiltshire 307 346 371 412 434 
			 Dyfed-Powys 208 198 208 223 237 
			 Gwent 231 233 251 255 255 
			 North Wales 405 381 384 408 422 
			 South Wales 973 959 1,015 1,045 1,120 
			   
			 Total 43 forces in:  
			 England and Wales 39,351 40,592 40,505 42,767 42,503 
		
	
	
		
			  March 
			 Police force area 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 
		
		
			 Avon and Somerset 902 899 1,171 1,195 1,204 
			 Bedfordshire 372 387 392 412 475 
			 Cambridgeshire 457 454 445 443 443 
			 Cheshire 511 515 554 582 616 
			 Cleveland 437 432 481 506 533 
			 Cumbria 396 409 414 436 443 
			 Derbyshire 534 502 604 602 625 
			 Devon and Cornwall 1,001 1,038 1,069 1,150 1,125 
			 Dorset 525 552 563 581 592 
			 Durham 557 533 534 533 491 
			 Essex 1,028 1,074 1,106 1,155 1,205 
			 Gloucestershire 361 367 375 381 381 
			 Greater Manchester 2,268 2,282 2,590 2,638 2,674 
			 Hampshire 994 1,052 1,078 1,151 1,231 
			 Hertfordshire 554 560 592 620 689 
			 Humberside 663 679 688 660 596 
			 Kent 982 1,038 1,110 1,099 1,091 
			 Lancashire 1,164 1,093 1,065 1,037 1,130 
			 Leicestershire 641 676 661 647 680 
			 Lincolnshire 438 464 488 493 502 
			 London, City of 283 301 320 332 345 
			 Merseyside 1,529 1,578 1,625 1,639 1,595 
			 Metropolitan Police 13,853 14,276 14,591 14,483 14,357 
			 Norfolk 431 445 464 496 493 
			 Northamptonshire 411 427 443 483 449 
			 Northumbria 1,226 1,186 1,225 1,277 1,278 
			 North Yorkshire 449 445 453 438 508 
			 Nottinghamshire 693 710 738 831 895 
			 South Yorkshire 892 893 1,065 1,177 1,149 
			 Staffordshire 715 740 737 746 749 
			 Suffolk 468 513 520 510 498 
			 Surrey 527 568 601 629 732 
			 Sussex 926 951 983 1,013 1,049 
			 Thames Valley 1,359 1,423 1,478 1,522 1,706 
			 Warwickshire 338 321 340 339 361 
			 West Mercia 836 851 925 919 949 
			 West Midlands 2,265 2,264 2,471 2,459 2,629 
			 West Yorkshire 1,875 1,821 1,867 1,912 1,965 
			 Wiltshire 464 466 492 477 464 
			 Dyfed-Powys 243 260 275 286 293 
			 Gwent 298 308 320 317 325 
			 North Wales 439 452 475 475 494 
			 South Wales 1,081 1,088 1,088 1,158 1,097 
			   
			 Total 43 forces in:  
			 England and Wales 46,373 47,283 49,466 50,229 51,096 
		
	
	
		
			  March 
			 Police force area 1996 1997(46) 1998 1999 2000 
		
		
			 Avon and Somerset 1,213 1,438 1,393 1,424 1,436 
			 Bedfordshire 472 484 523 483 490 
			 Cambridgeshire 530 607 574 586 503 
			 Cheshire 690 735 781 785 823 
			 Cleveland 553 609 586 552 595 
			 Cumbria 408 451 451 442 469 
			 Derbyshire 656 723 787 818 826 
			 Devon and Cornwall 1,121 1,159 1,186 1,215 1,343 
			 Dorset 621 615 651 702 686 
			 Durham 531 583 557 559 590 
			 Essex 1,130 1,199 1,252 1,273 1,348 
			 Gloucestershire 415 435 423 504 484 
			 Greater Manchester 2,749 2,612 2,661 2,623 2,822 
			 Hampshire 1,323 1,316 1,331 1,381 1,443 
			 Hertfordshire 754 818 831 835 890 
			 Humberside 683 718 789 840 840 
			 Kent 1,141 1,384 1,470 1,582 1,647 
			 Lancashire 1,349 1,126 1,143 1,198 1,422 
			 Leicestershire 667 755 774 802 805 
			 Lincolnshire 442 521 541 517 516 
			 London, City of 324 347 334 314 285 
			 Merseyside 1,560 1,343 1,502 1,356 1,458 
			 Metropolitan Police 14,372 13,493 12,432 11,257 10,605 
			 Norfolk 529 603 646 648 655 
			 Northamptonshire 511 554 577 587 599 
			 Northumbria 1,319 1,365 1,362 1,443 1,417 
			 North Yorkshire 520 519 543 541 492 
			 Nottinghamshire 979 1,003 987 1,039 1,024 
			 South Yorkshire 1,418 1,291 1,243 1,273 1,391 
			 Staffordshire 754 763 866 1,004 858 
			 Suffolk 485 522 583 594 600 
			 Surrey 754 727 743 733 762 
			 Sussex 1,131 1,149 1,185 1,393 1,328 
			 Thames Valley 1,738 1,825 1,827 1,799 1,786 
			 Warwickshire 376 376 398 406 394 
			 West Mercia 964 942 975 975 1,043 
			 West Midlands 2,780 2,739 2,817 2,652 2,695 
			 West Yorkshire 2,037 2,234 2,304 2,216 2,199 
			 Wiltshire 453 475 519 555 563 
			 Dyfed-Powys 310 322 341 341 359 
			 Gwent 378 452 477 487 498 
			 North Wales 512 476 479 508 519 
			 South Wales 1,287 1,206 1,132 1,223 1,081 
			   
			 Total 43 forces in:  
			 England and Wales 52,933 53,011 52,975 52,465 52,588 
		
	
	
		
			  March 
			 Police force area 2001(47) 2002 2003(48) 2004 2005 
		
		
			 Avon and Somerset 1,452 1,611 1,785 1,987 1,984 
			 Bedfordshire 491 524 595 654 706 
			 Cambridgeshire 614 733 786 826 817 
			 Cheshire 833 884 1,008 1,133 1,125 
			 Cleveland 586 626 694 760 742 
			 Cumbria 588 631 676 697 718 
			 Derbyshire 875 953 1,061 1,118 1,129 
			 Devon and Cornwall 1,453 1,639 1,834 1,917 2,007 
			 Dorset 682 741 793 809 871 
			 Durham 566 660 602 588 735 
			 Essex 1,447 1,571 1,682 1,876 1,955 
			 Gloucestershire 506 545 590 633 648 
			 Greater Manchester 2,858 3,135 3,173 3,394 3,248 
			 Hampshire 1,482 1,597 1,720 1,845 1,944 
			 Hertfordshire 935 1,121 1,299 1,366 1,382 
			 Humberside 808 816 880 959 1,026 
			 Kent 1,796 1,958 2,095 2,233 2,198 
			 Lancashire 1,369 1,442 1,489 1,642 1,686 
			 Leicestershire 806 816 934 989 1,009 
			 Lincolnshire 561 600 641 653 671 
			 London, City of 233 247 268 284 298 
			 Merseyside 1,418 1,532 1,752 1,851 2,114 
			 Metropolitan Police 10,040 10,459 11,358 12,144 13,127 
			 Norfolk 694 819 924 963 982 
			 Northamptonshire 694 742 812 858 958 
			 Northumbria 1,416 1,403 1,457 1,495 1,470 
			 North Yorkshire 591 743 723 864 - 930 
			 Nottinghamshire 1,039 1,087 1,180 1,270 1,299 
			 South Yorkshire 1,312 1,352 1,510 1,574 1,698 
			 Staffordshire 935 1,030 1,146 1,242 1,313 
			 Suffolk 621 692 713 779 803 
			 Surrey 897 1,043 1,245 1,318 1,431 
			 Sussex 1,454 1,507 1,578 1,774 1,950 
			 Thames Valley 1,891 2,061 2,412 2,589 2,573 
			 Warwickshire 412 459 503 520 587 
			 West Mercia 1,095 1,116 1,233 1,371 1,473 
			 West Midlands 2,819 3,007 3,012 3,100 3,083 
			 West Yorkshire 2,228 2,364 2,538 2,763 2,998 
			 Wiltshire 622 649 703 764 811 
			 Dyfed-Powys 401 459 502 523 525 
			 Gwent 537 570 607 623 688 
			 North Wales 498 645 703 832 836 
			 South Wales 1,270 1,435 1,366 1,415 1,465 
			   
			 Total 43 forces in:  
			 England and Wales 53,823 58,022 62,581 66,993 70,013 
		
	
	*=force unable to provide data.
	(43) Total strength is based on full-time equivalent figures that have been rounded to the nearest whole number, because of rounding there may be an apparent discrepancy between these totals and the totals in other tables. Between 1986–1995 the full-time equivalent figures were based on estimations. Figures exclude those staff on career breaks or maternity/paternity unless otherwise stated.
	(44) Civilian staff have been referred to as police staff since March 2003. Figures exclude traffic wardens, police community support officers and designated officers (s.38).
	(45) Strength figures for civilian staff were collected by HMIC from 1986 until 1995. The research development and statistics section within the Home Office, have been collecting and publishing this data since March 1996.
	(46) Boundary changes on 1 April 1996 transferred resources from South Wales Police to forces for the policing of the Rhmney Valley Gwent police.
	(47) Boundary changes on 1 April 2000 transferred some resources from the metropolitan police to Essex, Hertfordshire and Surrey police forces.
	(48) Strength figures as at 31 March 2003 include those staff on career breaks or maternity/paternity leave. Therefore these figures are not comparable with those provided for other years in the table.

Prisons

Henry Bellingham: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what the average (a) age and (b) tenure of prison governors at each establishment was in (i) 2005, (ii) 2001, (iii) 1997, (iv) 1992 and (v) 1987; and if he will make a statement.

Fiona Mactaggart: Information on the average age of prison governors (operational managers)—for each public sector Prison Service establishment in 2005 and 2001 is contained in the following table. The ages of individual governors is not available centrally for governors in post in 1997, 1992 and 1987. The amount of time that governors had spent at their specific establishment in a governor grade is also not available and could only be obtained at disproportionate cost. Information of this kind is not routinely monitored for contracted prisons, and could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.
	
		Average age of operational managers in each public sector prison service establishment
		
			  Average age of operational managers 
			 Establishment 31 December 2001 31 December 2005 
		
		
			 Acklington 49 years three months 45 years five months 
			 Albany 48 years eight months 49 years seven months 
			 Ashwell 52 years 10 months 43 years six months 
			 Askham Grange 50 years seven months 44 years three months 
			 Aylesbury 42 years nine months 41 years 11 months 
			 Bedford 43 years two months 46 years nine months 
			 Belmarsh 43 years 11 months 40 years eight months 
			 Birmingham 47 years two months 46 years six months 
			 Blakenhurst 41 years eight months 46 years six months 
			 Blantyre House 47 years nine months 43 years two months 
			 Blundeston 44 years two months 42 years 10 months 
			 Brinsford 45 years eight months 44 years two months 
			 Bristol 44 years nine months 41 years one month 
			 Brixton 49 years six months 42 years 10 months 
			 Brockhill 41 years three months 38 years five months 
			 Buckley Hall 44 years seven months 43 years two months 
			 Bullingdon 45 years three months 42 years four months 
			 Bullwood Hall 44 years one month 41 years nine months 
			 Camp Hill 49 years one month 51 years three months 
			 Canterbury 46 years 0 month 44 years seven months 
			 Cardiff 47 years nine months 45 years three months 
			 Castington 45 years eight months 48 years eight months 
			 Channings Wood 54 years three months 45 years nine months 
			 Chelmsford 44 years five months 42 years three months 
			 Coldingley 46 years five months 40 years 11 months 
			 Cookham Wood 47 years four months 43 years one month 
			 Dartmoor 47 years three months 45 years seven months 
			 Deerbolt 45 years one month 41 years eight months 
			 Dorchester 48 years 0 month 47 years two months 
			 Dover 43 years 10 months 45 years 10 months 
			 Downview 46 years three months 44 years two months 
			 Drake Hall 45 years five months 43 years eight months 
			 Durham 46 years seven months 43 years six months 
			 East Sutton Park 51 years eight months 51 years two months 
			 Eastwood Park 40 years six months 42 years five months 
			 Edmunds Hill 41 years nine months 47 years 10 months 
			 Elmley 45 years eight months 47 years four months 
			 Erlestoke 47 years 10 months 47 years four months 
			 Everthorpe 53 years one month 42 years one month 
			 Exeter 43 years four months 44 years seven months 
			 Featherstone 51 years two months 45 years six months 
			 Feltham 47 years eight months 46 years three months 
			 Ford 52 years one month 47 years three months 
			 Foston Hall 44 years four months 49 years two months 
			 Frankland 47 years nine months 45 years two months 
			 Full Sutton 43 years two months 45 years 11 months 
			 Garth 45 years four months 45 years 0 month 
			 Gartree 40 years six months 47 years nine months 
			 Glen Parva 44 years 0 month 49 years two months 
			 Gloucester 51 years one month 49 years nine months 
			 Grendon 44 years 0 month 46 years two months 
			 Guys Marsh 48 years 10 months 45 years nine months 
			 Haslar 42 years five months 43 years one month 
			 Haverigg 51 years five months 43 years seven months 
			 Hewell Grange 54 years 10 months 43 years one month 
			 High Down 44 years 11 months 42 years 0 month 
			 Highpoint 49 years five months 45 years two months 
			 Hindley 43 years 11 months 44 years one month 
			 Hollesley Bay 48 years nine months 48 years 11 months 
			 Holloway 48 years three months 43 years five months 
			 Holme House 50 years nine months 42 years five months 
			 Hull 44 years three months 46 years 0 month 
			 Huntercombe 46 years one month 40 years 11 months 
			 Kingston 50 years three months 49 years five months 
			 Kirkham 50 years three months 47 years five months 
			 Kirklevington Grange 50 years 0 month 50 years five months 
			 Lancaster 46 years one month 45 years nine months 
			 Lancaster Farms 43 years six months 42 years seven months 
			 Latchmere House 50 years 0 month 42 years nine months 
			 Leeds 47 years eight months 42 years six months 
			 Leicester 42 years three months 45 years 11 months 
			 Lewes 51 years five months 44 years one month 
			 Leyhill 43 years two months 46 years 10 months 
			 Lincoln 48 years 11 months 44 years seven months 
			 Lindholme 44 years seven months 45 years three months 
			 Littlehey 48 years 11 months 46 years six months 
			 Liverpool 48 years three months 47 years 0 month 
			 Long Lartin 44 years one month 44 years eight months 
			 Low Newton 47 years 10 months 44 years five months 
			 Maidstone 41 years two months 50 years one month 
			 Manchester 46 years four months 47 years nine months 
			 Moorland 47 years one month 45 years seven months 
			 Morton Hall 45 years 11 months 46 years 0 month 
			 New Hall 46 years 10 months 41 years 10 months 
			 North Sea Camp 51 years 11 months 49 years 0 month 
			 Northallerton 43 years 10 months 45 years 10 months 
			 Norwich 49 years 11 months 43 years 11 months 
			 Nottingham 43 years 11 months 46 years two months 
			 Onley 43 years 10 months 40 years four months 
			 Parkhurst 48 years 0 month 47 years one month 
			 Pentonville 42 years five months 44 years two months 
			 Portland 47 years 11 months 46 years seven months 
			 Preston 48 years six months 43 years four months 
			 Ranby 49 years seven months 44 years two months 
			 Reading 45 years four months 44 years 10 months 
			 Risley 47 years five months 44 years six months 
			 Rochester 45 years 10 months 45 years two months 
			 Send 46 years two months 51 years three months 
			 Shepton Mallet 47 years six months 50 years 10 months 
			 Shrewsbury 45 years two months 54 years five months 
			 Stafford 47 years three months 44 years five months 
			 Standford Hill 51 years 11 months 43 years two months 
			 Stocken 53 years seven months 49 years four months 
			 Stoke Heath 45 years one month 42 years 0 month 
			 Styal 44 years 10 months 41 years nine months 
			 Sudbury 53 years two months 46 years 0 month 
			 Swaleside 48 years one month 42 years four months 
			 Swansea 52 years six months 52 years seven months 
			 Swinfen Hall 47 years five months 41 years 11 months 
			 The Mount 46 years eight months 39 years six months 
			 The Verne 47 years six months 50 years 10 months 
			 Thorn Cross 53 years nine months 45 years one month 
			 Usk/Prescoed 55 years 11 months 49 years two months 
			 Wakefield 46 years three months 47 years 0 month 
			 Wandsworth 48 years nine months 39 years seven months 
			 Warren Hill — 50 years four months 
			 Wayland 46 years three months 50 years 0 month 
			 Wealstun 47 years five months 41 years 11 months 
			 Weare 45 years five months 53 years seven months 
			 Wellingborough 44 years six months 42 years 0 month 
			 Werrington 46 years nine months 50 years four months 
			 Wetherby 45 years 0 month 46 years two months 
			 Whatton 45 years 10 months 46 years four months 
			 Whitemoor 45 years 0 month 43 years seven months 
			 Winchester 45 years eight months 41 years 11 months 
			 Woodhill 46 years eight months 43 years two months 
			 Wormwood Scrubs 43 years eight months 43 years 11 months 
			 Wymott 43 years four months 48 years nine months 
			 All Establishments 46 years nine months 44 years 11 months

Prisons

David Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many drug tests were carried out in (a) Coldingley, (b) Chelmsford, (c) Elmley, (d) Rochester, (e) Wormwood Scrubs, (f) Holloway and (g) Belmarsh prisons in each of the last five years for which figures are available; and how many were (i) positive and (ii) negative in each case.

Fiona Mactaggart: There are three main types of drug testing in prisons: clinical, mandatory and voluntary. Data on clinical and voluntary testing is not held centrally. Figures recorded under the mandatory drug testing programme are as follows; they include results from both random and targeted tests.
	
		
			 Establishment 2001–02 2002–03 2003–04 2004–05 2005–06(49) 
		
		
			 Coldingley  
			 Tests 496 476 534 579 456 
			 Positive 72 79 99 93 80 
			 Negative 424 397 435 486 376 
			 Chelmsford  
			 Tests 527 457 406 1,040 1,179 
			 Positive 125 132 119 180 197 
			 Negative 402 325 287 860 982 
			 Elmley  
			 Tests 1,510 1,025 880 951 897 
			 Positive 272 189 131 195 105 
			 Negative 1,238 836 749 756 792 
			 Rochester  
			 Tests 410 418 615 755 685 
			 Positive 39 73 77 42 51 
			 Negative 371 345 538 713 634 
			 Wormwood Scrubs
			 Tests 493 703 795 1,006 727 
			 Positive 93 118 186 256 122 
			 Negative 400 585 609 750 605 
			 Holloway  
			 Tests 576 262 316 409 374 
			 Positive 131 69 75 73 48 
			 Negative 445 193 241 336 326 
			 Belmarsh  
			 Tests 1,076 1,138 666 755 589 
			 Positive 186 174 117 134 85 
			 Negative 890 964 549 621 504 
		
	
	(49) 1 April 2005 to 31 January 2006.

Administration Spending

John Pugh: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what percentage of their budgets each of the acute trusts currently in deficit spent on administration in 2004–05.

Jane Kennedy: The figures requested are shown in the table.
	
		
			  Administration costs as a percentage of total income 2004–05 retained surplus/(deficit) for the year (£000) 
		
		
			 Airedale NHS Trust 9.90 -3,288 
			 Bedford Hospital NHS trust 6.40 -8,480 
			 Birmingham Women's Health Care NHS Trust 7.80 -264 
			 Bolton Hospitals NHS Trust 8.40 -2,706 
			 Brighton and Sussex Univ Hosps NHS Trust 6.50 -10,035 
			 Buckinghamshire Mental Health NHS Trust 6.50 -1,049 
			 Burton Hospitals NHS Trust 7.00 -2,507 
			 Cambridge Uni Hospital NHS Found Trust 5.30 -995 
			 Cambs and Peterborough MH Partnership Trust 7.50 -348 
			 Cent Manchester/Manchester Child NHS Trust 5.90 -7,727 
			 Dartford and Gravesham NHS Trust 5.60 -1,146 
			 Devon Partnership NHS Trust 5.60 -535 
			 East and North Hertfordshire NHS Trust 7.10 -8,557 
			 East Lancashire Hospitals NHS Trust 6.40 -4,025 
			 East Sussex Hospitals NHS Trust 7.50 -4,983 
			 George Eliot Hospital NHS Trust 7.20 -786 
			 Good Hope Hospital NHS Trust 7.90 -3,576 
			 Great Ormond St. Hosp for Children NHS Trust 8.30 -557 
			 Hammersmith Hospitals NHS Trust 6.90 -17,819 
			 Hampshire Ambulance Service NHS Trust 4.60 -2,537 
			 Heatherwood and Wexham Park Hosps Trust 8.30 -4,186 
			 Hinchingbrooke Health Care NHS Trust 5.90 -1,566 
			 Hull and East Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust 5.70 -5,461 
			 Ipswich Hospital NHS Trust 6.40 -6,443 
			 Kettering General Hospital NHS Trust 6.30 -1,721 
			 King's College Hospital NHS Trust 7.10 -2,734 
			 Lancashire Teaching Hosp NHS Found Trust 6.70 -2,882 
			 Medway NHS Trust 7.60 -279 
			 Mid Essex Hospital Services NHS Trust 6.20 -2,299 
			 Mid Staffordshire Gen Hospitals Trust 7.10 -2,158 
			 Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust 6.90 -19,876 
			 North Middlesex University Hosp NHS Trust 7.30 -4,106 
			 North West London Hospitals NHS Trust 8.00 -11,744 
			 Northern Devon Healthcare NHS Trust 9.20 -991 
			 Plymouth Hospitals NHS Trust 5.90 -8,317 
			 Queen Elizabeth Hospital NHS Trust 7.90 -9,186 
			 Queen Mary's Sidcup NHS Trust 7.50 -4,608 
			 Royal Brnmth and Christcrch Foun Trust 6.20 -250 
			 Royal Brompton and Harefield NHS Trust 6.80 -3,217 
			 Royal Free Hampstead NHS Trust 7.10 -10,217 
			 Royal Nat Orthopaedic Hosp NHS Trust 8.30 -3,793 
			 Royal United Hospital Bath NHS Trust 7.30 -946 
			 Royal West Sussex NHS Trust 7.20 -15,483 
			 Royal Wolverhampton Hospital NHS Trust 6.80 -9,016 
			 Sandwell and West Birmingham Hosps NHS Trust 7.20 -7,806 
			 Scarborough and NE Yorks NHS Trust 6.40 -4,506 
			 Shrewsbury and Telford Hospital NHS Trust 7.00 -10,115 
			 South Tees Hospitals NHS Trust 7.30 -8,898 
			 South Warwickshire Gen Hosps NHS Trust 7.80 -8,783 
			 Southampton University Hosps NHS Trust 5.00 -11,579 
			 Southport and Ormskirk Hospital NHS Trust 6.20 -1,189 
			 St. George's Healthcare NHS Trust 8.00 -21,656 
			 St. Mary's NHS Trust 8.10 -3,219 
			 Surrey and Sussex Healthcare NHS Trust 8.60 -30,657 
			 The Lewisham Hospital NHS Trust 7.90 -7,505 
			 The Queen Eliz Hosp King's Lynn NHS Trust 5.60 -8,499 
			 Trafford Healthcare NHS Trust 8.30 -3,490 
			 Uni Coll London Hosp NHS Found Trust 6.50 -4,930 
			 United Lincolnshire Hospitals NHS Trust 5.80 -4,913 
			 University Hosps of Morecambe Bay NHS Trust 6.80 -1,548 
			 Walsall Hospitals NHS Trust 8.10 -1,845 
			 West Dorset General Hospitals NHS Trust 6.80 -448 
			 West Hertfordshire Hospitals NHS Trust 8.40 -9,978 
			 West Middlesex University Hosp NHS Trust 7.40 -3,991 
			 West Midlands Ambulance Service NHS Trust 5.00 -203 
			 West Suffolk Hospitals NHS Trust 6.60 -7,638 
			 Weston Area Health NHS Trust 7.20 -5,154 
			 Wrightington, Wigan and Leigh NHS Trust 7.80 -743 
		
	
	Source:
	Audited summarisation schedules of NHS trusts 2004–05

Alzheimer's Disease

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what representations she has received regarding the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence recommendation to restrict the use of anticholinesterase drugs to patients in the moderate stages of Alzheimer's disease.

Liam Byrne: Since the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) published its latest "Appraisal Consultation Document on the use of Alzheimer's disease drugs" on 23 January 2006, aside from correspondence from members of the public, Ministers have received representations from the Faculty of Old Age Psychiatry of the Royal College of Psychiatrists and the Alzheimer's Society. It is for NICE to consider responses to its consultation.

Alzheimer's Disease

Lynne Featherstone: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what measures have been taken to assist carers of patients with advanced Alzheimer's disease in each London constituency; and if she will make a statement.

Liam Byrne: All carers, including those caring for people with dementia, are entitled to an assessment to determine their needs as carers and eligibility for support. This Government have supported legislation which supports all carers in their caring role. The Carers and Disabled Children Act 2000 strengthens the rights of carers to an assessment of their own needs as carers. The Carers (Equal Opportunities) Act 2004 introduced new provisions that will ensure that carers are made aware of this right.
	The carers grant, worth £185 million in 2005–06 and set at the same level for each of the next two years, provides money for local councils to provide short breaks and services to carers to enable them to continue in their caring role. Carers are also entitled to cash payments for carers' services to enable them to purchase the type of support they require and promote a better quality of life.
	At a local level, it is for councils to determine how they support carers in their area depending on local needs and priorities.

Arm's Length Bodies

Andrew Lansley: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many arm's length bodies have been (a) established and (b) dissolved by her Department since 1997; and what the total costs of establishment or dissolution was in each case.

Liam Byrne: The information requested on the number of arm's length bodies (ALBs) established and dissolved by the Department since 1997 is shown in the table. Information on the major costs associated with the closure and setting up of bodies would form part of the relevant bodies' accounts but would not normally be designated as such. This information cannot therefore be provided in the form sought.
	
		The number of ALBs set up and abolished by the Department between 1997 and 2006
		
			  Number of ALBs at start of year Number of ALBs set up in year Number of ALBs abolished in year Number of ALBs at end of year 
		
		
			 1997–98 26 0 0 26 
			 1998–99 26 2 0 28 
			 1999–2000 28 2 0 30 
			 2000–01 30 6 3 33 
			 2001–02 33 4 1 36 
			 2002–03 36 5 5 36 
			 2003–04 36 5 3 38 
			 2004–05 38 8 9 37 
			 2005–06 37 6 11 32 
			 Projected position as at  1 April 2006 32 0 6 26 
		
	
	Notes:
	1. ALBs are defined here as executive agencies, executive non-departmental public bodies and special health authorities.
	2. The numbers include a significant number of successor bodies for bodies being merged.

Christmas Cards

Andrew Lansley: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the total cost to her Department was of sending Christmas cards in 2005.

Liam Byrne: All expenditure incurred in the purchase and postage of official Christmas cards is made in accordance with the Department's guidance on financial procedures and propriety, based on principles set out in Government Accounting. Recipient lists are co-ordinated to avoid duplication.
	Separate figures for postage costs are not available, as some cards will have been included with other correspondence. The vast majority of those that were not so included were sent using second class post.
	Staff numbers, and their time, spent on separate tasks are not recorded, but the amount in each case would have been minimal.
	The available information is shown in the table.
	
		
			  Number of official cards posted  Cost £ 
		
		
			 2003 2,250 2,689 
			 2004 2,500 3,480 
			 2005 1,900 2,854 
		
	
	The cost of each card purchased in 2005 (apart from 200 obtained through a separate order) included a donation of 10 pence to the charities listed.
	2Care
	Action for Blind People
	Age Concern
	Alzheimer's Society
	Amnesty International
	Anthony Nolan Trust
	ARC—Arthritis Research Campaign
	Asthma UK
	Barnardo's
	Blue Cross
	Bodleian Library
	Bone Marrow Research
	Breakthrough Breast Cancer
	British & International Sailors' Society
	British Eye Research Foundation
	British Lung Foundation
	Campaign to Protect Rural England
	Cancer Research UK
	Carers UK
	Centrepoint
	ChildLine
	Combat Stress
	Crossroads Association
	Cruse Bereavement Care
	Cystic Fibrosis Trust
	Epilepsy Action
	EveryChild
	Help the Aged
	Iris Fund for Prevention of Blindness
	KIDS
	Leonard Cheshire
	Leukaemia Research Fund
	Macmillan Cancer Relief
	Marine Conservation Society
	Meningitis Trust
	Mildmay Mission Hospital
	Mind
	Motabity
	Motor Neurone Disease Association
	Multiple Sclerosis Trust
	Muscular Dystrophy Campaign
	National Autistic Society
	National Children's Bureau
	National Eczema Society
	NCH Action for Children
	NSPCC
	Oxfam
	Plan International UK
	Princess Royal Trust for Carers
	Queen Elizabeth's Foundation
	RNIB
	RNID
	RNLI
	Royal Air Force Benevolent Fund
	Royal Mencap Society
	Royal Society of Arts
	Royal Star & Garter Home
	RSPCA
	Scope
	St. John Ambulance
	Talking Newspaper Association
	The Children's Trust
	The Salvation Army
	Tommy's
	Tuberous Sclerosis Assoc
	UNICEF
	United Response
	WaterAid
	Vitalise

Community Hospitals

Sandra Gidley: To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will take steps to ensure that primary care trusts with deficits are supported to keep community hospitals open.

Jane Kennedy: The White paper, "Our health, our care, our say", sets out a new vision for the future of community health and social care services. Paragraph 6.43 makes the following commitment:
	"PCTs taking current decisions about the future of community hospitals will be required to demonstrate to their SHA that they have consulted locally and have considered options such as developing new pathways, new partnerships and new ownership possibilities. SHAs will then test PCT community hospital proposals against the principles of this White Paper."
	The Department has written to strategic health authorities (SHAs) reminding them of this commitment and setting out the practical arrangements for SHAs. This applies to all primary care trusts (PCTs) and it is for SHAs to work especially closely with PCTs that are forecasting deficits.

Community Hospitals

Edward Davey: To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will place in the Library copies of guidance, instructions and requests sent to Kingston primary care trust on community hospitals since the publication of the White Paper Our Health, Our Care, Our Say.

Liam Byrne: The Department has not sent any communications on community hospitals, directly to primary care trusts (PCTs) since the publication of the recent Health White Paper, "Our Health, Our Care, Our Say: a new direction for community services" in January 2006.
	However, a letter relating to the community hospital commitment made in paragraphs 6.42 and 6.43 of the White Paper was sent out to strategic health authorities (SHAs) on 16 February. This letter provided instruction on how SHAs should go about ensuring and testing PCT compliance with the commitment and a copy is available in the Library.

Dementia

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what steps are being taken by her Department to improve care for people with dementia and their families and carers.

Liam Byrne: The Department's policy on the treatment and support of those with Alzheimer's disease and their carers is stipulated in the mental health standard of the older people's national service framework.
	This policy has been reinforced with the publication of the Department's service development guide, "Everybody's Business", which outlines the key components of a comprehensive older people's mental health service including dementia care.

Dentistry

Hugh Bayley: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the average remuneration per full-time equivalent NHS general dental practitioner was in the York and Selby Primary Care Trust area in each year since 1997.

Rosie Winterton: Average remuneration per full-time equivalent national health service general dental practitioner in the York and Selby Primary Care Trust area alone is not identifiable from the data available centrally.
	All estimated average annual net incomes, between 1997–98 and 2004–05, of general dental service (GDS) dentists with a reasonable commitment to the GDS are shown in the table. These are calculated by first estimating average gross GDS income of a dentist with a reasonable NHS commitment and then applying estimates of the expenses to earnings ratio covering dentists.
	
		Estimated average GDS net income for dentists with a reasonable GDS commitment(51), 1997–98 to 2004–05, England and Wales
		
			 Financial year Estimated average net GDS income 
		
		
			 1997–98 51,200 
			 1998–99 54,300 
			 1999–2000 55,700 
			 2000–01(52) (53)59,200 
			 2001–02 60,500 
			 2002–03 63,300 
			 2003–04 66,700 
			 2004–05 70,000 
		
	
	Note:
	The income figures cover both estimated fees for treatments and patient capitation as well as other estimated payments such as seniority payments and commitment payments and payments for maternity and sickness. Income from private sources is excluded from these estimates.
	(51) Dentists with a reasonable commitment to the GDS are defined as dentists with GDS earnings equivalent to at least £40,000 in 1993–94 in fees for treatments and patient capitation. This equivalent is calculated each year by adjusting figures to take into account the effect of fee increases. The equivalent figure for 2004–05 is £59,100.
	(52) Commitment payments started in 2001
	(53) Figures since 2000–01 use a different methodology to calculate the contribution from other non-fee/capitation payments
	Source:
	Department of Health and Health and Social Care Information Centre analysis of Dental Practice Board payments and HMRC tax data

Dentistry

Clare Short: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many claims for NHS dental treatment were received by the Dental Practice Board in 2004–05.

Rosie Winterton: holding answer 6 March 2006
	The table shows the number of claims made by general dental services (CDS) and personal dental services (PDS) dentists in England in year ending 31 March 2005.
	
		
			 All  Adults Children 
		
		
			 GDS 29,357,532 23,936,400 5,421,132 
			 PDS 3,249,595 2,491,131 758,464 
			 GDS and PDS 32,607,127 26,427,531 6,179,596 
		
	
	Source:
	Dental Practice Board

Dentistry

Tim Farron: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many dentists have left the NHS since the announcement of the new dental services contract in each of the last five years in (a) England and (b) Westmorland and Lonsdale.

Rosie Winterton: holding answer 16 March 2006
	The following table shows the numbers of leavers and new entrants in England and in Westmoreland and Lonsdale as at 30 September in each specified year. Draft regulations governing general dental services (GDS) contracts and personal dental services (PDS) agreements were first published in August 2005.
	
		
			of which: 
			  England Westmorland and Lonsdale 
			  Complete leaver Complete new entrant Complete leaver Complete new entrant 
		
		
			 2001 1,207 1,747 2 4 
			 2002 1,352 1,523 1 1 
			 2003 1,236 1,474 4 3 
			 2004 1,224 1,632 2 1 
			 2005 1,097 2,283 1 1 
		
	
	Notes:
	1. Complete leaver means
	"dentist had an open contract in September of year one but no GDS or PDS contract in England in September of year two"
	2. Complete new entrant means
	"dentist had an open contract in September of year two but no GDS or PDS contract in England in September of year one"
	3. This includes all notifications up to 8 November 2005.
	4. Areas have been defined using the Office of National Statistics all fields postcode directory—May 2005.
	Source:
	Dental Practice Board

Departmental Expenditure

Oliver Heald: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how much was spent on entertainment by her Department in 2004–05; and how much of that sum is accounted for by (a) food, (b) alcohol, (c) staff and (d) accommodation.

Liam Byrne: The Department spent £592,000 on entertainment during 2004–05. The breakdown of expenditure figures for alcohol, staff and accommodation can be obtained only at disproportionate cost.

Dr Chai Patel

Phil Willis: To ask the Secretary of State for Health in what capacity Dr Chai Patel has worked with her Department since 1997.

Liam Byrne: Dr. Chai Patel does not currently act as an advisor to the Department. From 1997 to 2002, he was part of the Government's better regulation task force leading on a number of reports including one on long-term care. In 2000, the Health Secretary appointed Dr. Patel to the modernisation action team drawing up a national plan for the new national health service. He was also part of the task force for older people.

Drug Treatment Programmes

Iain Duncan Smith: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many people in drug treatment in England are being prescribed (a) methadone and (b) buprenhorphine; and what proportion of the treatment budget was spent on the purchase of each drug in the last period for which figures are available.

Caroline Flint: holding answer 20 March 2006
	The Department does not hold information centrally for the number of people in drug treatment who receive prescribed drugs methadone and buprenorphine.
	In 2004, there were 462.785 prescriptions of buprenorphine hydrochloride identified for the treatment of substance dependence at a cost of £11,438.409. In the same year 1,721.074 prescriptions of methadone hydrochloride were identified as having been dispensed, costing £13,972.629 1 . There may be some limited cross-over with buprenorphine, and to a lesser degree methadone, prescribed for analgesia since the same preparation is marketed under different names for the two purposes.
	We are unable to calculate accurately the proportion of the treatment budget spent on the purchase of each prescribed drug. The total estimated expenditure drug treatment for the national health service for 2004–05 including local funding was £457 million.
	1 ePACT Data
	This information was obtained from the prescribing analysis and cost tool (PACT) system, which covers prescriptions prescribed by general practitioner (GP) practices in England and dispensed in the community in the United Kingdom. For data at primary care trust (PCT) level, prescriptions written by a GP practice located in a particular PCT but dispensed outside that PCT will be included in the PCT in which the GP practice is based. Prescriptions written in England but dispensed outside England are included. Prescriptions written in hospitals/clinics that are dispensed in the community, prescriptions dispensed in hospitals and private prescriptions are not included in PACT data. It is important to note this as some BNF sections have a high proportion of prescriptions written in hospitals that are dispensed in the community.
	For example, BNF chapter 4, "Central Nervous System" has a fair proportion of items written in mental health clinics that are dispensed in the community—these prescriptions are not included in PACT data.

Expert Patients' Programme

Andrew Lansley: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what resources she plans to commit to supporting the expansion of the expert patients' programme as described in paragraph 5.17 of the White Paper "Our Health, Our Care, Our Say" in each financial year from 2006–07 to 2011–12; whether she plans to introduce condition-specific expert patients' programmes; and when she plans to establish a community interest company to deliver the expert patients' programme.

Liam Byrne: A community interest company to market and deliver the expert patients' programme (EPP) will be established during 2006. The White Paper, "Our health, Our Care, Our Say" made a commitment to treble the investment in the EPP and to support the transition to a social enterprise organisation. It is the intention of the EPP to diversify and be more responsive to the needs of marginalised and vulnerable groups. This is likely to include disease specific modules or courses.

General Practitioners

Nick Hurd: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many general practitioners (GPs) there are in (a) Ruislip-Northwood constituency and (b) each London borough; and what estimate she has made of the number of GPs likely to retire over the next five years.

Jane Kennedy: This information is not held in the format requested. However, the table shows numbers of general medical practitioners for each London primary care trust and a further breakdown by age band.
	
		General medical practitioners (excluding retainers and registrars) by age band as at 30 June 2005: England Numbers (headcount)
		
			   All practitioners (excluding retainers and registrars(57) of which 50–54 55–59 60–64 65–69 70 and over 
		
		
			  London 4,846 673 697 445 222 68 
			 
			 Q05 North Central London 811 116 122 84 41 10 
			 5A9 Barnet PCT 236 37 35 19 11 1 
			 5K7 Camden PCT 143 19 14 7 7 (58)— 
			 5C1 Enfield PCT 163 27 33 23 8 4 
			 5C9 Haringey Teaching PCT 140 17 27 26 7 3 
			 5K8 Islington PCT 129 16 13 9 8 2 
			 
			 Q06 North East London 937 122 165 102 56 23 
			 5C2 Barking and Dagenham PCT 83 7 20 22 10 3 
			 5C3 City and Hackney PCT 168 16 25 11 9 3 
			 5A4 Havering PCT 124 20 21 17 7 2 
			 5C5 Newham PCT 165 21 32 22 13 7 
			 5NA Redbridge PCT 123 15 24 12 5 (58)— 
			 5C4 Tower Hamlets PCT 129 27 17 5 4 1 
			 5NC Waltham Forest PCT 145 16 26 13 8 7 
			 
			 Q04 North West London 1,175 148 176 125 50 15 
			 5K5 Brent PCT 203 26 31 37 15 2 
			 5HX Ealing PCT 190 20 43 20 9 3 
			 5H1 Hammersmith and Fulham PCT 103 8 12 8 7 3 
			 5K6 Harrow PCT 142 24 22 12 5 (58)— 
			 5AT Hillingdon PCT 139 21 17 22 3 3 
			 5HY Hounslow PCT 140 18 18 13 4 1 
			 5LA Kensington and Chelsea PCT 108 10 15 6 2 1 
			 5LC Westminster PCT 150 21 18 7 5 2 
			 
			 Q07 South East London 1,028 145 133 74 47 8 
			 TAK Bexley Care Trust 121 18 21 5 7 1 
			 5A7 Bromley PCT 211 38 21 13 7 3 
			 5A8 Greenwich PCT 117 18 18 18 11 (58)— 
			 5LD Lambeth PCT 214 25 25 13 6 (58)— 
			 5LF Lewisham PCT 175 25 25 10 6 2 
			 5LE Southwark PCT 190 21 23 15 10 2 
			 
			 Q08 South West London 895 142 101 60 28 12 
			 5K9 Croydon PCT 227 45 25 13 9 7 
			 5A5 Kingston PCT 110 20 15 7 3 1 
			 5M6 Richmond and Twickenham PCT 122 16 17 2 2 (58)— 
			 5M7 Sutton and Merton PCT 242 30 27 19 7 1 
			 5LG Wandsworth PCT 194 31 17 19 7 3 
		
	
	(57) General medical practitioners (excluding retainers and registrars) includes contracted general practitioners, general medical service others and personal medical services others.
	(58) Denotes zero.
	Source:
	Health and Social Care Information Centre General and Personal Services Statistics

Healthcare Commission

Andrew Tyrie: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what indicators the Healthcare Commission uses to assess the performance of organisations which enter into contracts for NHS-funded work.

Jane Kennedy: The Healthcare Commission assesses national health service organisations under powers provided by the Health and Social Care Act (Community Health and Standards) Act 2003, and private and voluntary health care providers under powers in the Care Standards Act 2000.
	The Commission may assess organisations contracted to provide for NHS funded work under either of these sets of powers. If a non-NHS provider of NHS services is registered as a provider of independent health care under the 2000 Act they are assessed using the Regulations and National Minimum Standards provided under that Act. If such a provider is not so registered and where they are commissioned by an NHS organisation it is for that organisation to ensure that the services comply with "Standards for Better Health", the national standards set under the 2003 Act, using the criteria of the Commission's Annual Health Check process.
	In addition, health care provided for NHS patients, be it by the NHS or for the NHS by a non-NHS establishment, may be reviewed by the Healthcare Commission under 2003 Act, against the NHS standards—"Standards for Better Health"—published by the Secretary of State in July in 2004. As part of its review process, the Healthcare Commission ensures that services for NHS patients delivered from outside the NHS are commissioned against these standards, including those covering patient safety.
	The Department is currently reviewing the application of the powers under these two Acts to ensure equivalence of assessment of all organisations providing NHS services.

London Health Services (Financing)

Lynne Featherstone: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the latest financial position is of each (a) London health authority and (b) London primary care trust; and if she will make a statement.

Jane Kennedy: The forecast outturn position for 2005–06, as submitted by national health service organisations (strategic health authorities, primary care trusts and NHS trusts) at the mid-year point (month six), is available in the Library and is available on the Department's website at: www.dh.gov.uk/PublicationsAndStatistics/FreedomOfInformation/ClassesOf/Information/fs/en.

Mental Health

Tim Loughton: To ask the Secretary of State for Health which mental health trusts she expects to be in deficit at the end of the 2005–06 financial year; and what she expects the deficit to be in each case.

Jane Kennedy: The information requested is provided in the following table.
	
		Mental health trusts forecasting a deficit in 2005–06 £000
		
			 Mental health trusts forecasting a deficit 2005–06 month six forecast outturn surplus/(deficit) 
		
		
			 5 Boroughs Partnership NHS Trust (4,071) 
			 Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Mental Health Partnership NHS Trust (3,500) 
			 East London and The City Mental Health NHS Trust (585) 
		
	
	Source:
	2005–06 monthly financial monitoring returns
	The forecast outturn position for 2005–06, as submitted by national health service organisations (strategic health authorities, primary care trusts and NHS trusts) at the mid-year point (month six), is available in the Library and is available on the Department's website at: www.dh.gov.uk/PublicationsAndStatistics/FreedomOfInformation/ClassesOf Information/fs/en

Myalgic Encephalomyelitis

Norman Lamb: To ask the Secretary of State for Health 
	(1)  how many requests for funding of biomedical research into myalgic encephalomyelitis have been received by the Medical Research Council in each of the last five years; and how many of these requests were (a) granted and (b) refused;
	(2)  how many requests for funding of psychiatric paradigms for coping with myalgic encephalomyelitis were received in each of the last five years; and how many of these requests were (a) granted and (b) refused.

Barry Gardiner: I have been asked to reply.
	The number of requests received by MRC for research on Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (CFS)/ Myalgic Encephalomyelitis (ME) and the number of grants awarded in each of the last five years is as follows:
	
		
			  Applications Awarded Declined 
		
		
			 2001 2 1, 21 0 
			 2002 2 (61)2 0 
			 2003 4 (62)1 3 
			 2004 10 0 10 
			 2005 (63)14 2 9 
		
	
	(59) Awarded in 2002
	2 Proceed to full proposal which was later funded
	3 Both awarded in 2003
	4 Awarded in 2004
	5 Three still under consideration
	MRC does not use the term psychiatric paradigms in identifying research applications.

NHS Finance

Andrew Tyrie: To ask the Secretary of State for Health whether (a) Royal Free Hampstead NHS Trust, (b) Barts and the London NHS Trust, (c) Hammersmith Hospitals NHS Trust, (d) St. Mary's NHS Trust, (e) University College London Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, (f) Royal West Sussex NHS Trust, (g) Guy's and St. Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, (h) Airedale NHS Trust, (i) Brighton and Sussex University Hospitals NHS Trust, (j) the Dudley Group of Hospitals NHS Trust, (k) Barnet and Chase Farm Hospitals NHS Trust, (l) The Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust, (m) Tameside and Glossop Acute Services NHS Trust, (n) Medway NHS Trust, (o) Bolton Hospitals NHS Trust, (p) Heatherwood and Wexham Park Hospitals NHS Trust, (q) Basildon and Thurrock University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, (r) George Eliot Hospital NHS Trust, (s) West Middlesex University Hospital NHS Trust and (t) Burton Hospitals NHS Trust are paid on the (i) contracted payment mechanism and (ii) national tariff price mechanism.

Liam Byrne: In 2005–06, the following national health service trusts are being paid via the payment by results tariff for elective, non-elective, out-patient and accident and emergency activity:
	Guy's and St. Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust;
	University College London Hospital NHS Foundation Trust;
	Basildon and Thurrock University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust.
	In 2005–06, the following NHS trusts are being paid via the payment by results tariff for elective activity:
	Royal Free Hampstead NHS Trust;
	Barts and the London NHS Trust;
	Hammersmith Hospitals NHS Trust;
	St. Mary's NHS Trust;
	Royal West Sussex NHS Trust;
	Airedale NHS Trust;
	Brighton and Sussex University Hospitals NHS Trust;
	The Dudley Group of Hospitals NHS Trust;
	Barnet and Chase Farm Hospitals NHS Trust;
	The Princess Alexandra Hospitals NHS Trust;
	Tameside and Glossop Acute Services NHS Trust;
	Medway NHS Trust;
	Bolton Hospitals NHS Trust;
	Heatherwood and Wexham Park Hospitals NHS Trust;
	George Eliot Hospital NHS Trust;
	West Middlesex University Hospital NHS Trust; and
	Burton Hospitals NHS Trust.
	All other activity not covered by the payment by results tariff for all the listed organisations is paid via locally agreed contracts between commissioners and providers.

NHS Staff Pay

Steve Webb: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what estimate she has made of the number of NHS staff whose pay will not increase between 2005–06 and (a) October 2009 and (b) April 2011 because of the protected pay elements of "Agenda for Change".

Liam Byrne: Following the review of the early implementer experience in partnership with the national unions, we recognised that the pay of around 7.5 per cent. of staff would need to be protected in the first full year of implementation. This was anticipated to reduce by 2.5 per cent. within the first year. It is not possible to break this figure down further.

Nurses

Paul Rowen: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what percentage of graduate nurses are (a) employed as a nurse, (b) employed elsewhere in the NHS and (c) unemployed six months after graduation in (i) England, (ii) each region and (iii) each strategic health authority.

Liam Byrne: holding answer 16 March 2006
	This information is not collected centrally.

Nurses

Paul Rowen: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many nurses graduated in each of the last five years; and how many nurses are expected to graduate over the next five years.

Liam Byrne: holding answer 16 March 2006
	In 2004–05, higher education statistics agency data shows that there were 17,513 students who successfully obtained a nursing or midwifery qualification (as recognised by the nursing and midwifery council) at a publicly-funded Higher Education Institution in England. Of these, 16,140 students were on a nursing course and 1,373 were studying midwifery.
	These figures include both degree and diploma students as well as those who had graduated/diplomated in the previous reporting year but whose qualification was only reported in 2004–05. Similarly, there will be students who graduated in 2004–05 whose qualification will only be reported in the 2005–06 dataset.
	Information prior to 2004–05 is not currently available.
	The table shows the projected number of nurse graduates and diplomates from 2005–06 to 2000–10. This was forecast on the assumptions that numbers entering training each year will remain at current levels and the attrition rate during training is 18 per cent.
	
		
			  Nurses 
		
		
			 2005–06 17,824 
			 2006–07 18,708 
			 2007–08 19,737 
			 2008–09 19,394 
			 2009–10 19,394 
		
	
	Source:
	Higher Education Statistics Agency Student Record 2004–05.

Private Finance Initiative

Stephen O'Brien: To ask the Secretary of State for Health pursuant to the answer of 12 July 2005, Official Report, column 989W, on the private finance initiative (PFI), what the projected deficit is for (a) year end 2005–06 and (b) was for year end 2005–06 at month six for (i) Derby Hospitals NHS Trust, (ii) Cambridge University Hospitals, (iii) Gloucestershire Hospitals, (iv) Newham Healthcare NHS Trust, (v) Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, (vi) University College London Hospitals, (vii) Cornwall Healthcare NHS Trust and (viii) Norfolk and Norwich Health Care.

Jane Kennedy: The forecast outturn position for 2005–06, as submitted by national health service organisations at the mid-year point (month six), is a net deficit of around £620 million. The 2005–06 month six forecast outturn position for individual NHS organisations (strategic health authorities, primary care trusts and NHS trusts) is available on the Department's website at: www.dh.gov.uk/PublicationsAndStatistics/FreedomOflnformation/ClassesOflnformation/fs/en
	Copies of this information are also available in the Library.
	The financial position for foundation trusts is not included. Monitor have responsibility for overseeing the financial performance of NHS foundation trusts.
	Detailed in-year monitoring data is used for operational management of the NHS. It is not appropriate to publish the data on an on-going basis during the year.

Predictive Diallers

John Hemming: To ask the Secretary of State for Health pursuant to the answer of 7 March 2006, Official Report, column 1251W, on predictive diallers, what estimate she has made of the cost of establishing whether any public body for which her Department is responsible uses predictive dialling.

Liam Byrne: My reply of 7 March 2006, Official Report, column 1251W, on predictive diallers was based on an estimate that it would cost between £3,000 and £6,000 (£5 to £10 for each public body concerned) to obtain this information from the bodies themselves.

Primary Care Trusts

John Hemming: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how much purchaser protection adjustment she expects to be lost to each primary care trust in each of the next three years.

Liam Byrne: holding answer 16 February 2006
	The 2006–07 payment by results transitional adjustments for commissioners are based on giving primary care trusts 50 per cent. parity. No decision has yet been made on these adjustments beyond 2006–07.

Spending Review (Efficiency Targets)

Theresa Villiers: To ask the Secretary of State for Health 
	(1)  how much is expected to be saved as a result of meeting the civil service workforce reductions targets for her Department set out in the 2004 Spending Review; and whether these savings count towards the agreed efficiency target for her Department set out in the Review;
	(2)  what the target level of employment expressed as full-time equivalents is in her Department by April 2008, in order to meet her Department's civil service workforce reductions target set out in the 2004 Spending Review;
	(3)  what baseline figures she is using for assessing progress on her Department's targets to reduce (a) the total number of civil service posts by 720 and (b) the staffing of arms-length bodies by at least 5,000; what progress has been made towards these targets to date; and what the total efficiency savings achieved to date are for these targets;

Theresa Villiers: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what interim targets she has set for achieving (a) the agreed efficiency target for her Department and (b) the civil service workforce reductions targets for (i) gross reductions in posts, (ii) net reductions in posts and (iii) relocations for her Department, as set out in the 2004 Spending Review; what the baseline figures are against which these interim targets are assessed; on what dates they will take effect; and by what dates these interim targets are intended to be met.

Liam Byrne: The estimated net saving in the Department's annual operating costs, for which the headcount reduction target is a key contributing factor, is approximately £60 million per year by 2008. These savings form part of the efficiency opportunities in public funding and regulation costs, a key workstream identified by the Gershon review, "Releasing Resources to the Front Line" and therefore will count towards the Department's total efficiency target of £6.5 billion.
	The target full time equivalent level of employment to achieve the headcount target is 2,245. The baseline for this target was 3,645 budgeted posts in March 2003. Of the 1,400 posts planned reduction, 680 were expected to be transfers to other organisations that would not count towards the Gershon target. The Department change programme to deliver these reductions was announced in February 2003. The Gershon commitment to 720 net reductions was predicated on this programme and therefore agreement was made with HM Treasury for this specific target for an appropriate earlier baseline date.
	The baseline for reductions in staffing of arms length bodies (ALBs) is 25,174 at 1 April 2004. The targeted headcount reduction of 25 per cent. is a separate policy commitment as published in "Reconfiguring the Department's Arms Length Bodies" (July 2004). This does not form part of the Gershon headcount reduction targets, which relate specifically to civil servants. It is however a driver for cost efficiency savings in ALBs.
	The target for Lyons relocations is full time equivalent 1,110 posts by March 2010. The baseline for this target is zero at March 2004.
	There are no interim targets for headcount reductions (the Department or ALB), relocations or efficiency savings. The Department's commitment is to achieve the full savings by the target date of March 2008 for headcounts and efficiency savings and 2010 for relocations.
	In our autumn performance report, published in December 2005, we reported a net reduction of 695 full time equivalent civil service posts at September 2005. We also reported efficiency savings of £46 million for the public funding and regulation workstream, through the Department and ALB change programmes.
	The ALB programme is on track to deliver a reduction of around 900 full time equivalent posts by April 2006. Remaining reductions are planned to be delivered by reconfigurations due to take effect in 2006–07 and 2007–08.

Telephone Numbers

Anne Milton: To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will list the (a) 0800, (b) 0845 and (c) 0870 telephone numbers for the public administered by (i) her Department and (ii) agencies which report to her.

Liam Byrne: The Department runs or supports the following helplines, using the 0800, 0845 telephone numbers for the public.
	
		
			  Telephone number 
		
		
			 Asian Tobacco Helpline 08001690881 
			 Asian Tobacco Helpline 08001690882 
			 Asian Tobacco Helpline 08001690883 
			 Asian Tobacco Helpline 08001690884 
			 Asian Tobacco Helpline 08001690885 
			 British Heart Foundation (Tobacco) 08001691900 
			 CALM (mental health) 0800585858 
			 Career Development Loans 0800585505 
			 Drinkline 08009178282 
			 FRANK 0800776600 
			 (FRANK Minicom 108009178765 
			 Health Literature Line 0800555777 
			 Hepatitis C Line 08000850859 
			 (Hepatitis C Line 0800451451 
			 Know the Score (Scottish drugs helpline) 08005875879 
			 Pregnancy Smoking Helpline 08001699169 
			 Sexual Health Line 0800567123 
			 Sexwise 0800282930 
			 Smoking Helpline 08001690169 
			 Smoking Helpline Minicom 08001690171 
			 NHS learning and development Helpline (U I) 08000150850 
			 Welfare foods helpline 8002562665 
			 Winter Warmth Advice Line 08000857000 
			 Winter Warmth Advice Line textphone 08000857857 
			   
			 Blood donor helpline 08457711711 
			 Disabled Living Foundation 08451309177 
			 EHIC order line 08456050707 
			 EHIC enquiry line 08456062030 
			 NHS Accommodation 08456008594 
			 NHS Accommodation Helpline 08456040240 
			 NHS Careers 08456060655 
			 NHS Direct 0845 46 47 
			 Organ Donation (client deals direct with BT) 08456060400 
			 Organ Donation Minicom 08456060599 
			 Prescription Prepayment Certificate orderline 08456018076 
			 Prescription Pricing Authority info line 08456018076 
			 Saneline 08457678000 
			 Sexual Health direct 08453101334 
			 Social Work and Care Careers Recruitment 08456046404 
			 Social Work and Care Careers Recruitment Minicom 08456016121 
		
	
	The Department is currently not using any 0870 telephone numbers for the public.
	It is not possible to list the 0800, 0845 and 0870 telephone numbers for the public administered by agencies which report to the Department. This information can be provided only at disproportionate costs.

TGN 1412

Andrew Lansley: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what discussions she has had with the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency on the suspension of the phase 1 clinical trial authorisation of the drug TGN 1412; and if she will make a statement.

Jane Kennedy: The Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) immediately notified Ministers of the suspension of the authorisation of the drug TGN 1412 clinical trial on 14 March 2006. I refer to the reply I gave on Thursday 16 March 2006, Official Report, columns 105–106WS. An investigation into the circumstances of the case is currently under way as a matter of urgency. Ministers are regularly informed of developments and will make further statements when investigations are concluded.
	I have had two discussions with the MHRA on this issue. One was a telephone call with the Chief Executive, Professor Kent Woods, on Tuesday 14 March 2006. I also had a brief meeting with members of the MHRA executive board during a pre-planned visit to the MHRA on Thursday 16 March2006.

TGN 1412

Andrew Lansley: To ask the Secretary of State for Health 
	(1)  whether the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) was aware of (a) the inflammatory effect on the lymph nodes of two monkeys of the drug TGN 1412 in pre-clinical testing and (b) the adverse drug reaction seen in early human trials of the drug anti-CLTA4 antibody prior to TGN 1412 receiving its authorisation for a phase 1 clinical trial;
	(2)  what the trial protocol approved by the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency stipulated in respect of the length of time between which the doses of the drug TGN 1412 should be administered to the different participants in the phase 1 clinical trial; and whether this protocol was followed.

Jane Kennedy: All data submitted by the applicant in support of the clinical trials authorisation (CTA) application, including primate toxicology studies, was reviewed by experienced Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency assessors and was considered in reaching their decision to approve the trial.
	The CTLA4 trial refers to a different monoclonal antibody directed at a different T cell receptor acting via a different mechanism. The adverse events which occurred in 12/41 patients appeared to be milder and somewhat different from the TGN 1412 reactions. It is not clear how the findings from this trial might relate to the events that occurred in the trial of TGN 1412.
	The protocol required that dosing of all trial participants occurred during a two-hour period.
	An investigation is ongoing into the cause of the events associated with this trial.

Waiting Lists

Peter Bone: To ask the Secretary of State for Health pursuant to the Minister of State's Oral Statement of 20 March 2006, Official Report, column 120 and to the answers of 14 February 2006, Official Report, column 2030W, on waiting lists/times, and 13 March 2006, Official Report, column 2030W, on waiting lists, what the evidential basis is for the statement that no-one waits more than six months for an operation.

Jane Kennedy: The six-month operational standard came into effect across the national health service from 1 January 2006. No patient should have to expect to wait longer than this.
	Latest data for end January 2006 showed that 74 patients (less than 0.1 per cent.) were waiting over six months. This contrasts with the position under the previous administration, when 10 per cent. of patients were waiting over two years.

Waiting Times

Lynne Featherstone: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the average waiting time for those referred for treatment by GPs in (a) each London primary care trust and (b) each London health authority was in each year since 1996; and if she will make a statement.

Jane Kennedy: Data for the estimated average waiting times for first outpatient appointments following a general practitioner written referral was first collected for the quarter ending in June 1997.
	The table shows figures for June 1997 to June 2001 for national health service organisations that previously existed at that time and for June 2002 to December 2005 for current NHS organisations.
	
		Estimated average waiting time for first outpatient appointment following general practitioner written referral, June 1997 to June 2001 (responsible population based)
		
			   Median waiting time (weeks) quarter ended June 
			 Code Name 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 
		
		
			 QA2 Hillingdon HA 6.7 7.4 8.3 9.1 7.6 
			 QA3 Kensington, Chelsea and Westminster HA 5.8 3.9 8.0 6.9 6.6 
			 QA4 Enfield and Haringey HA 6.8 7.7 8.6 8.8 n/a 
			 QA5 Redbridge and Waltham Forest HA 7.3 7.4 8.7 8.8 8.3 
			 QAA Bexley and Greenwich HA 5.6 7.3 6.9 7.3 n/a 
			 QAC Bromley HA 8.0 8.2 8.7 6.6 n/a 
			 QAD Croydon HA 5.0 6.0 6.7 7.1 6.0 
			 QAG Kingston and Richmond HA 5.4 4.6 5.4 5.9 5.6 
			 QAH Lambeth, Southwark and Lewisham HA 7.1 8.2 7.9 7.0 7.2 
			 QAJ Merton, Sutton and Wandsworth HA 5.3 3.6 7.0 6.7 6.4 
			 QAP Barking and Havering HA 8.0 8.2 8.7 8.0 8.4 
			 QAQ Barnet HA 5.6 6.6 7.1 7.7 n/a 
			 QAR Brent and Harrow HA 6.8 5.8 7.2 6.9 6.9 
			 QAT Camden and Islington HA 5.8 6.4 6.4 6.4 6.2 
			 QAV Ealing, Hammersmith and Hounslow HA 5.6 6.4 6.7 6.4 6.3 
			 QAW East London and City HA 7.5 8.9 8.5 8.1 7.6 
			 QEW Barnet, Enfield and Haringey n/a n/a n/a n/a 8.0 
			 QEY Bromley, Bexley and Greenwich n/a n/a n/a n/a 7.3 
		
	
	n/a=not applicable
	Notes:
	1. QM08R Return was first introduced for quarter ended June 1997.
	2. Health authority (HA) reorganisation 2001–02: Barnet HA and Enfield and Haringey HA merged to form Barnet, Enfield and Haringey HA. Bexley and Greenwich HA and Bromley HA merged to form Bromley, Bexley and Greenwich HA.
	Source:
	Department of Health form QM08R
	
		Estimated average waiting time for first outpatient appointment following general practitioner written referral, June 2002 to June 2005—Primary care trusts (PCT) within strategic health authorities (SHA) in London (responsible population based)
		
			   Median waiting time (weeks) quarter ended June 
			 Code Name 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 
		
		
			 5AT Hillingdon PCT 7.8 7.6 7.3 7.0 6.7 
			 5H1 Hammersmith and Fulham PCT 6.3 6.4 6.2 7.2 7.5 
			 5HX Ealing PCT 7.3 5.7 8.3 8.1 7.8 
			 5HY Hounslow PCT 6.6 6.9 7.1 6.7 6.8 
			 5K5 Brent PCT 6.5 7.5 8.0 8.5 7.9 
			 5K6 Harrow PCT 7.9 7.9 9.1 8.5 8.2 
			 5LA Kensington and Chelsea PCT 6.3 6.8 6.6 6.8 6.5 
			 5LC Westminster PCT 7.1 7.6 7.0 7.5 7.0 
			  North West London SHA 7.0 7.1 7.5 7.6 7.4 
			
			 5A9 Barnet PCT 8.3 7.9 7.7 7.6 7.4 
			 5C1 Enfield PCT 10.5 8.3 8.0 7.9 7.9 
			 5C9 Haringey PCT 7.5 6.7 6.5 7.1 6.9 
			 5K7 Camden PCT 8.2 7.1 7.2 9.4 7.2 
			 5K8 Islington PCT 6.0 6.1 6.3 10.6 6.4 
			  North Central London SHA 8.2 7.3 7.2 8.2 7.2 
			
			 5A4 Havering PCT 8.4 8.8 8.1 6.9 6.9 
			 5C2 Barking and Dagenham PCT 9.1 8.7 8.6 7.3 7.3 
			 5C3 City and Hackney PCT 7.5 6.5 5.8 5.7 5.5 
			 5C4 Tower Hamlets PCT 7.7 7.6 7.7 7.4 7.0 
			 5C5 Newham PCT 7.5 6.9 7.0 8.3 8.3 
			 5C6 Walthamstow, Leyton and Leytonstone PCI 8.8 n/a n/a n/a n/a 
			 5C7 Chingford, Wanstead and Woodford PCT 8.2 n/a n/a n/a n/a 
			 5C8 Redbridge PCT 9.5 n/a n/a n/a n/a 
			 SNA Redbridge PCT n/a 9.4 7.3 7.2 8.5 
			 5NC Waltham Forest PCT n/a 8.6 8.1 7.9 7.2 
			  North East London SHA 8.2 7.9 7.4 7.2 7.2 
			
			 5A7 Bromley PCT 6.6 5.9 6.1 6.1 6.9 
			 5A8 Greenwich PCT 8.7 7.6 7.2 6.7 6.8 
			 5LD Lambeth PCT 8.3 8.0 7.5 7.1 7.1 
			 5LE Southwark PCT 8.4 7.9 7.7 7.1 7.1 
			 5LF Lewisham PCT 8.1 8.4 7.7 6.8 6.6 
			 5AX Bexley PCT 8.1 7.3 n/a n/a n/a 
			 TAK Bexley Care Trust n/a n/a 7.0 6.6 6.9 
			  South East London SHA 7.9 7.4 7.2 6.7 6.9 
			
			 5A5 Kingston PCT 6.7 7.0 6.8 6.7 6.4 
			 5K9 Croydon PCT 6.8 5.8 7.7 6.6 6.7 
			 5LG Wandsworth PCT 6.6 7.0 6.2 6.4 5.7 
			 5M6 Richmond and Twickenham PCT 5.8 6.0 6.2 6.1 6.3 
			 5M7 Sutton and Merton PCT 6.9 7.3 6.9 6.7 6.9 
			  South West London SHA 6.6 6.6 6.8 6.5 6.5 
		
	
	n/a=not applicable
	Notes:
	1. SHAs in London: North West London, North Central London, North East London, South East London, South West London.
	2. PCT re-organisation 2003–04: Redbridge PCT (5C8) and Chingford, Wanstead and Woodford PCT (part) merged to form Redbridge PCT (5NA). Walthamstow, Leyton and Leytonstone PCT and Chingford, Wanstead and Woodford PCT (part) merged to form Waltham Forest PCT.
	Source:
	Department of Health form QM08R

Flood Reports

Michael Gove: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what consultations have taken place on the role of flood reports in home information packs.

Yvette Cooper: The consultation paper "Contents of the home information pack", ODPM 2003, sought views on whether the pack should include an environmental report covering, among other things, flood risk. The draft "Home Information Pack Regulations 2006" and associated guidance published for consultation in October 2005 proposed that a flood risk search should be an authorised component of the home information pack. The results of that consultation are currently being discussed with key industry stakeholders, consumer representatives and others.

Housing

Caroline Spelman: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what estimate he has made of the number of households which (a) rented in the private sector, (b) rented in the social housing sector, (c) were owner occupiers owning outright, (d) were owner occupiers with mortgage and (e) purchased a property for the first time with a mortgage in year since 1996–97.

Yvette Cooper: In answer to (a), (b), (c) and (d), the estimated number of households in England by tenure in each year since 1996 was as follows.
	
		Table 1: number of households in England by housing tenure, 1996–2005 Thousand
		
			  Tenure 
			  Owner occupiers  
			  Owned outright Buying with a mortgage Social renters Private renters Total 
		
		
			 1996 5,115 8,407 4,218 1,995 19,735 
			 1997 5,236 8,351 4,194 2,053 19,834 
			 1998 5,384 8,398 4,124 2,063 19,970 
			 1999 5,563 8,458 4,037 1,998 20,057 
			 2000 5,740 8,527 3,930 2,017 20,213 
			 2001 5,840 8,444 3,979 2,035 20,298 
			 2002 5,988 8,466 3,952 2,112 20,517 
			 2003 6,133 8,441 3,779 2,212 20,564 
			 2004 6,239 8,337 3,784 2,226 20,586 
			 2005 6,320 8,326 3,656 2,385 20,687 
		
	
	Source:
	ONS Labour Force Survey
	(e) I refer the hon. Member to the answer given on 6 February 2006, Official Report, columns: 914W–15W.

Housing

Jeremy Browne: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what steps the Government are taking to meet its target to provide 60 per cent. of new homes on brownfield sites by 2008.

Yvette Cooper: The policies in Planning Policy Guidance Note 3: "Housing" (PPG3) and in draft Planning Policy Statement 3: "Housing" (PPS3), published for consultation in December 2005, in particular the policy to give priority to developing suitable brownfield land in preference to greenfield, support the target that, by 2008, 60 per cent. of additional housing should be on brownfield land. The latest Land Use Change Statistics show that 72 per cent. of new dwellings were built on brownfield land in 2004.

Housing

Jeremy Browne: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister whether it is his Department's policy to use urban greenfield land for social housing developments.

Yvette Cooper: The Government's planning policy for housing set out in Planning Policy Guidance Note 3: "Housing" (PPG3) gives priority to re-using suitable brownfield land in preference to the development of greenfield. Draft Planning Policy Statement 3 "Housing" (PPS3), published for consultation in December 2005, continues the priority for development of brownfield land. However, both PPG3 and draft PPS3 recognise that there may be circumstances where suitable greenfield land is needed to meet the level of housing provision set out in Regional Spatial Strategies.

Housing

Brooks Newmark: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what guidance he issues to local authorities which plan to ballot tenants on housing stock transfer proposals; and what assessment he has made of the effect of the Government's proposed review of strategic investment in council housing on that guidance.

Yvette Cooper: The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister's "Housing Transfer Manual—2005 Programme" provides guidance to authorities who wish to transfer ownership and management of all or part of their housing stock to a registered social landlord. Section 10 deals with the consultation exercise and establishing tenants views on the proposals. We are not proposing to change the guidance.

Local Government Finance

Caroline Spelman: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what departmental working groups are carrying out work for departmental sections (a) HSF6—Right to Buy, (b) LGF 4D—National Non-Domestic Rates Policy, (c) LGF 5—Council Tax Capping Division and (d) LGF 2B—Council Tax and Valuation Tribunals Policy Branch.

Jim Fitzpatrick: There is no formal definition of what constitutes a departmental working group. There is currently no internal group which is referred to as a "working group" working for the Office of The Deputy Prime Minister's sections listed.

Ministerial Travel

Norman Baker: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister when he last travelled on official business by train.

Jim Fitzpatrick: The Deputy Prime Minister travelled by train to and from his constituency on Monday and Thursday last week, beginning Monday 20 March, as he does on a regular basis.
	All Ministerial travel is undertaken in accordance with the rules set out in the "Ministerial Code" and "Travel by Ministers", copies of which are available in the Libraries of the House.

Multiple Occupation Licensing

Eric Pickles: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what minimum property attributes are needed for a local authority to introduce discretionary house in multiple occupation licensing of a residential property.

Yvette Cooper: Section 56 of the Housing Act 2004 gives local authorities powers to licence HMOs that fall outside the scope of mandatory licensing.
	Before designating an area for additional licensing, local authorities must consider that the HMOs which will be covered by such designation are giving rise to problems for the occupants of the property or members of the public because of poor management arrangements. They are also required to consult those likely to be affected by the designation and take account of any representations received.
	The Act requires authorities to ensure that the use of additional licensing is in accordance with their overall housing strategy and forms part of a co-ordinated approach to deal with wider issues such as homelessness and anti-social behaviour. They are also required to ensure that there are no other courses of action that could be used to deal with the problems identified and that additional licensing will, whether on its own or in conjunction with other policies, make a significant contribution to dealing with the problems from which the area is suffering.

Multiple Occupation Licensing

Eric Pickles: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what property attributes are necessary for mandatory house in multiple occupation licensing of a residential property.

Yvette Cooper: Mandatory HMO licensing will apply to the highest risk HMOs which have been identified as those of three or more storeys and occupied by five or more persons who together form two or more households.

Official Residences

Oliver Heald: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister if he will list the official residences for which his Department is responsible; who occupies each one; what the annual cost is of running each property; what contribution the occupants of each make towards running costs; what the total capital and refurbishment expenditure was on those properties in 2004–05; how much was spent in each property on (a) flowers and plants, (b) wine and entertaining, (c) food, (d) telephone bills and (e) electricity and gas in 2004–05; how many (i) domestic and (ii) maintenance staff are employed at each property, broken down by post; and what the total cost of staff employment was in 2004–05.

Jim Fitzpatrick: With regard to which residencies the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister is responsible for and who occupies them, my right hon. Friend the Deputy Prime Minister occupies Admiralty House as his official residence assigned to him by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister.
	On general running and refurbishment/maintenance costs of residencies, I refer the hon. Member to the answer given on 25 October 2005, Official Report, column 326W to the hon. Member for Meriden (Mrs. Spelman).
	Ministers occupying official residencies do not pay tax on the living accommodation itself. However, tax is paid on the ancillary services (lighting, heating etc) a sum limited to 10 per cent. of his/her taxable ministerial salary and benefits (if any). The costs of other expenditure items in the official residence in Admiralty House of my right hon. Friend the Deputy Prime Minister are as follows:
	(a) There have been no flowers or plants provided from public funds.
	(b) The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister's entertainment budget does not detail expenditure by venue and this could be provided only at disproportionate cost.
	(c) There has been no expenditure on food from public funds.
	(d) The cost of telephone calls was £486.57 in 2004–05.
	(e) With regard to the cost of electricity and gas, the operation of Admiralty House is covered by a single facilities management contract which covers maintenance, renovation, security and running costs. It is not possible, within the overall total, to separately identify the electricity and gas costs that arise from the three flats in Admiralty House, although for internal accounting purposes the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister meets 20.7 per cent. of the costs of the operation of the entire building. The 20.7 per cent. is derived from the floor area of the flat occupied by my right hon. Friend the Deputy Prime Minister, as a proportion of the total floor area of Admiralty House.
	(i) There are no domestic staff providing services in the official residence occupied by my right hon. Friend the Deputy Prime Minister.
	(ii) Maintenance within the residence is provided under a Cabinet Office contract and the cost of this is included within the service charge. There are no maintenance staff employed exclusively in my right hon. Friend the Deputy Prime Minister's official residence.
	The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister also has the use of Dorneywood, which is a Trust property available for use by Ministers.

Right-to-Buy

Andrew Stunell: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what the capital receipts from right to buy were in each year since 1997, broken down by local authority area.

Yvette Cooper: Figures for the right-to-buy capital receipts in each year since 1998–99 by local authority area can be found on the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister's website (http://www.odpm.gov.uk/pub/383/Table648Excel545Kb_id1156383.xls). Information is available only for the years shown.